[1]International Information Programs

   August 30, 2005

              CONSTITUTION:  'IRAQIS DECIDE THEIR OWN DESTINY'


   KEY FINDINGS


   **  Media fault Washington's "indecent haste" to complete the
   constitution.

   **  Sunni disaffection threatens consensus on self-rule.

   **  Global outlets debate:  "federalism, or a foundation for
   partition?"

   **  Iraqi papers generally line up along predictable political lines.


   MAJOR THEMES


   'High Speed'--  Writers argued Bush's "hastiness" to bring a "success
   story" to a U.S. audience has "dramatically escalated" a situation
   where "wisdom" and "willingness to compromise" were required.  The
   conservative Australian concurred with global media that agreement on
   the constitution "under the pressure of time" means a "postponement of
   the problem."


   Sunnis 'unwilling to submit' to majority rule--  Editorialists worried
   that ignoring Sunni "needs and interests" in the draft constitution
   will prove a "dangerous move" because the Sunnis, posited one Malaysian
   writer, have been "hoisted into a position to make or break any deal."
   Brazil's liberal Folha de S. Paulo added that any agreement excluding
   the Sunnis means the "perpetuation or even the intensification" of
   "civil war."  A pro-constitution Iraqi writer described Sunnis as
   suffering from "a ruler's logic and not that of one who has been
   ruled."


   'Afraid of federalism'--  Media differed in their assessments of the
   divisive "battle" over federalism.  Canada's centrist Globe and Mail
   blamed Shia and Kurdish leaders for putting "their own religious and
   secular interests" ahead of the "country's needs," while one Russian
   editorialist criticized "wily" Sunni politicians who "deliberately
   exaggerate" problems despite the "concessions" made to them.  According
   to most Arab writers, federalism is a "step backward" that will have a
   "dangerous and destructive" result.  One Syrian paper alleged the U.S.
   agenda is to "divide and rule," predicting the call to establish
   federal regions will "dwarf" Iraq and open the door for a "new
   Sykes-Picot."  Federalism may be the "best possible solution,"
   countered Lebanon's independent Al-Balad, adding that Iraq was united
   only "under a dictatorship."


   Support for 'free and fair' referendum--  Anti-coalition writers in
   Iraq saw the constitution as a "plan to divide Iraq."  One editorialist
   termed the National Assembly a "theater of the absurd," calling on
   Iraqis to reject a draft prepared in the White House "kitchen."  SCIRI
   (Supreme Council of Islamic Resistance in Iraq) affiliated
   editorialists denounced anti-federalism groups for "trying to impose"
   agendas not in the "Iraqi national interest," and questioned their
   intent in seeking to remove the article banning the Ba'ath party.  KDP
   (Kurdish Democratic Party) writers claimed that central governments in
   Iraq are "ripe for dictatorships," and blamed Iraqi media for failing
   to educate the public about federalism.  Those who oppose it, argued
   Al-Ta'akhi, are either "ignorant" or have a "nationalistic, or
   religious desire to control others."  Independent papers, for or
   against the draft, lauded the "democratic process," saying that
   disagreement between the three groups is a "healthy point" in
   constitution building.  Ad-Dustoor declared, "This is how Iraqis should
   discuss and decide their future--through democracy and freedom."

   Prepared by Media Reaction Branch (202) 203-7888, rmrmail@state.gov


   EDITOR:  Erin Carroll


   EDITOR'S NOTE:  Media Reaction reporting conveys the spectrum of
   foreign press sentiment.  Posts select commentary to provide a
   representative picture of local editorial opinion.  Some commentary is
   taken directly from the Internet.  This report summarizes and
   interprets foreign editorial opinion and does not necessarily reflect
   the views of the U.S. Government.  This analysis was based on 153
   reports from 30 countries over 19 August - 30 August, 2005.  Editorial
   excerpts are listed from the most recent date.


   EUROPE


   BRITAIN:  "Stay Flexible On Iraq's Draft Constitution.  Further
   Amendments May Be Needed Before Referendum"


   The independent Financial Times (8/30) editorialized:  "The reality is
   that for all its might the U.S. has limited leverage over internal
   Iraqi politics.  It should take a step back and stop trying to
   micro-manage a process it cannot control.  Identifying U.S. interests
   and U.S. success exclusively with a Yes vote on October 15 would be a
   mistake:  it is not obvious that the U.S. is better off with a Yes that
   isolates the Sunnis than a No that brings them into the political
   process."


   "Spinning To The Future"


   The left-of-center Guardian declared (8/30):  "Not surprisingly, given
   the mounting domestic unpopularity of the Iraqi adventure, there has
   been heavy spin in Washington (and London) as well as Baghdad.  George
   Bush's comparison of the Iraqi constitutional exercise with the
   Philadelphia convention of 1787 is as fatuous as it is irrelevant.  But
   others are out of touch with a brutally changed reality too.  Amr
   Moussa, secretary general of the Arab League, lamenting a constitution
   that threatens chaos, seemed to hark back to the halcyon days of a
   Middle East of stable dictatorships."


   "Beacon Of Hope Fades"


   The left-of-center Guardian (8/24) editorialized:  "A month before the
   invasion of March 2003, Bush said a free Iraq could become 'a beacon of
   democracy across the Middle East.'  It is highly unlikely that Bush or
   anyone else in Washington, not even in the right-wing think tanks, will
   be claiming Iraq as a 'beacon of democracy.'  They will not be making
   the boast at all if, as is likely, the U.S. pulls out against a
   backdrop of insurgency, lawlessness, power cuts, erratic oil
   production, water shortages, the threat of breakup and the increased
   influence of Iran."


   "The American Obsession With A Quick Constitution Is A Recipe For
   Disaster In Iraq"


   Patrick Cockburn wrote in the center-left Independent (8/24):  "The
   determination of American diplomats in Baghdad over the past few days
   to force a draft constitution through the Iraqi national assembly at
   high speed is not aimed at producing a political success to coincide
   with the birthday of President George Bush.  But it has everything to
   do with the desperate need of the White House, as popular support for
   the war in Iraq ebbs by the day across the U.S., to show that it is
   making progress.  It is not Iraqi but American political priorities
   which are paramount.  This is turning out to be a recipe for disaster."


   "Freedom And Unity--Constitution Must Find Ways To Link These Virtues"


   The conservative Times editorialized (8/24):  "The effort of drafting a
   constitution capable of commanding broad assent and respect is taxing
   Iraqi society to the limit.  Millions of Iraqis, bred to fear and blind
   obedience, will barely, until now, have given thought to what a
   democratically ordered Iraq may be like.  The vehemence of the
   arguments, on street corners and in committee rooms, will have come to
   many of them as a shock.  Even for the drafters, some of whom have
   spent years hoping and planning for the opportunity to build a
   democratic state, the process has been an education, revealing just how
   complicated is the mosaic of regional and local, ethnic and tribal,
   religious and secular, loyalties and beliefs that Saddam Hussein's
   ruthlessly centralized dictatorship had repressed."


   "Iraq's Constitution Must Build Consensus, Not Deepen Rifts"


   The independent Financial Times stated (8/24):  "Meeting deadlines in
   Iraq is important, not least for a U.S. administration desperate to
   show symbolic progress and shore up waning domestic support for its
   policies.  But in the face of a resilient insurgency and growing
   sectarian attacks, the overriding consideration today must be to ease
   sectarian divisions and stop Iraq's dangerous slide into civil war."


   FRANCE:  "Failures"


   Gerard Dupuy wrote in left-of-center Liberation (8/29):  "Without the
   allied armies, namely the American Army, never would the Iraqis have
   been so close to having a Constitution so well tailored to their
   multiple needs.  A little Islam, a little human rights....  This
   intricate distribution is also the only chance for the text to be
   adopted by the Iraqis.  The Sunnis, who have violently rejected the
   U.S. presence...could lead the project to fail....  A project which is
   also the only trump card Bush has in his hand to bring back his
   troops....  With `the boys' in mind, Bush pushed hard for the
   Constitution.  But if it fails, President Bush will get the opposite of
   what he wanted.  While trying to gain time, he could end up having lost
   time.  Because there is no doubt that the count down has begun in the
   minds of those surrounding the President....  His public opinion is
   against him, and the rumors of troop disengagement are a result of the
   President's mounting unpopularity.  As the game play becomes more
   difficult, it seems the president has less and less time.  On the
   opposite side, the pro-Saddam insurgents possess a deadly weapon: to
   prolong the situation."


   "For The Iraqis, A Constitution, But Problems Remain"


   Pierre Prier noted in right-of-center Le Figaro (8/29):  "If one is to
   believe Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, Iraq has been saved from the
   risks of a civil war....  But if one look closely at the constitutional
   text, nothing seems to have been permanently resolved....  The main
   concern of the government and the various factions seems to have been
   to gain time and give in to pressures from Washington, which is eager
   to see a positive outcome and begin military disengagement
   proceedings....  But in reality, the same problems appear
   unresolved....  In Baghdad, the U.S. Ambassador showed less enthusiasm
   than President Bush, acknowledging that a rejection by the Sunnis on
   October 15 would create `a problem.'"


   "Iraq On The Brink of Breaking"


   Gilles Delafon opined in right-of-center Le Journal du Dimanche
   (8/29):  "It is Washington's whole strategy of reconciliation which is
   at stake and could fail....  President Bush's worries are such that he
   even called the Shiite leader el-Hakim asking for more flexibility....
   The democratic solution that will be coming out of the ballots does not
   appear to be a guarantee for pacifying Iraq.  And the new victim of
   Iraq's paradoxes is President Bush himself: not only has he had to
   court el-Hakim, Iraq's pro-Iran figure, to allow more room to former
   pro-Saddam proponents, he is also being threatened by American
   Evangelists who say they will withdraw their support if the Iraqis
   adopt a Constitution which gives too much importance to Islam."


   "Bush's Disturbing Optimism"


   Jacques Amalric observed in left-of-center Liberation (8/25):
   "Experience has taught us that President Bush's remarks are an
   excellent barometer for measuring the evolution of the situation in
   Iraq--the more he is optimistic, the worse the situation.... This is
   why we should be concerned about his optimistic declarations on
   Tuesday.... Reality of course is different: the text of the
   Constitution is said to be giving the lion's share to Islam as the
   `principal source' in Iraq's legislation.... The fact that the Sunni
   community has not been integrated in the constitutional project is a
   major political failure for the U.S. and a marked success for the
   `pro-Saddamists' and their Islamic allies.... The U.S. refused to allow
   enough time for the project because of its eagerness to accelerate
   Iraq's political process.... If the Constitution is rejected next
   October, this could intensify the rampant civil war and push the Kurds
   and the Shiites to proclaim their autonomy.  This would be enough to
   destabilize an already shaky region which has Iran increasingly
   enmeshed in Iraq's affairs.  Time is pressing for Bush the optimist,
   whose Iraq policy is approved by a mere 34 percent in the U.S."


   "For Iraq, A Constitution Full Of Dangers"


   Christophe Boltanski wrote in left-of-center Liberation (8/24):  "The
   White House, which is in dire need of good news from Iraq, saluted the
   `advance made in Iraq.'  But even if an agreement on the Constitution
   is reached by Thursday, it will not help to reduce violence on the
   ground or put an end to the controversy in the U.S.  In its editorial,
   the NY Times was very critical of the charter which it considers to be
   an open door to a `Iranian-style theocracy' in Iraq."


   "The Neo-Conservative Ambassador From Kabul To Baghdad"


   Corine Lesnes commented in left-of-center Le Monde (8/24):  "Khalizad
   was among the neo-conservatives who had initially said that toppling
   Saddam would help spread democracy in the Middle East....  After having
   been `Bush's Afghan' he has become `Condi's Iraqi.'  But Baghdad is not
   Kabul....  The former Ambassador, John Negroponte had shined by his
   discretion....  Today the Iraqis resent Washington's pressures....
   Khalizad does not deny having provided fully written parts of the
   Constitution to the Iraqis....  Khalizad continues to believe that Iraq
   can be an example for the Middle East....  After the August 15 failure,
   he went back to the drawing board, especially since the Constitution is
   the key to Washington's exit strategy."


   "In Iraq, Policy, Not War"


   Jeffrey Sachs of the Earth Institute opined in right-of-center Les
   Echos (8/24):  "In Iraq, the U.S. has won the war of the skies but
   cannot impose itself on the ground....  War is often a sign that
   politics have failed....  Every time the U.S. refuses to give a date
   for the withdrawal of its troops from Iraq, it feeds the
   insurrection....  Too many Iraqis are ready to die in their fight
   against the occupier....  No one doubts the need to fight terrorism.
   But the war in Iraq and huge military spending are something else.
   Americans must invest in peaceful development rather than in military
   bases in countries that are being exploited.  The U.S. must withdraw
   from Iraq.  Afterwards, the U.S. will be able to use its political and
   economic weight to participate in the management of a complex and
   difficult situation it has helped create."


   GERMANY:  "Fatal Time Pressure"


   Reymer Klüver had this to say in center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung of
   Munich (8/29):  "This failure could hardly be more spectacular....
   Even though a constitutional draft has formally be presented, the talks
   de facto failed because the Sunnis refuse to approve the text.  The
   United States is faced with a pile of debris:  Its strategy to force
   the arguing groups in Iraq to find an agreement by insisting on a tight
   timetable for the formation of the government, the agreement on a
   constitutional draft and parliamentary elections failed.   Those who
   give ultimata and set deadlines should at least have an idea of what
   should happen if this agreement is not reached...but the events in Iraq
   showed that the Americans had no 'Plan B,' no idea of what needs to be
   done if the Sunnis continue to refuse to give their approval.  Right
   from the onset, it was a mistake to reach an agreement by exerting time
   pressure....  A new wave of violence will now break out in Iraq if the
   Sunnis leave the political debate after the bickering about a new
   constitution and support extremists and rebels.  If this happens, the
   Americans would not only be faced with a political but also a military
   failure in Iraq."


   "Iraqi Dilemmas"


   Rainer Herrmann argued in a front-page editorial in center-right
   Frankfurter Allgemeine (8/29):  "Formally the Iraqi convention on the
   drafting of a constitution has reached its goal...but politically it
   failed: all sides involved did not reach a comprehensive consensus....
   This first attempt for a constitution is threatening to fail because
   two dilemmas cannot be resolved: First, it requires much time to work
   out a constitution...but Iraq does not have this time....  The second
   dilemma is even harder to dissolve.  During many centuries, the Sunnis
   ruled over the region.  Obviously, they are not yet willing to submit
   to the Shiite majority, while the Shiite and the Kurds plan to
   radically break with the past....  The goals of the three ethnic groups
   differ too much and they cannot be met in a central state."


   "Hope For Iraq"


   Dietrich Alexander contended in right-of-center Die Welt of Berlin
   (8/29):  "A constitutional draft for Iraq after all!  It is by no means
   clear whether this is also the hour of beginning of a new
   Islamic-democratic model state....  We cannot and should not expect the
   Iraqis to pull a rabbit out of the constitutional hat that can define
   an Iraqi identity and harmonizes with Kurdish and Shiite efforts for
   autonomy....  We should beware of too much euphoria, but overwhelming
   pessimism is also out of place in view of this respectable and
   democratic achievement of the Iraqi constitutional fathers....  The
   three large ethnic groups should first of all find a modus vivendi
   which reflects...the power realities in Iraq and that could be changed
   and amended later and be adjusted to the situation.  That is why the
   convention acted wisely by referring the question of federalism to a
   future institution with greater legitimacy....  The Kurds must then bid
   farewell to their previous priority treatment and overrepresentation
   like some Shiites from the idea of an Islamic religious state, or the
   Sunnis from their striving for a central authority....  But a federal
   structure should not mean that the Sunnis are turned to pariahs and
   live in a large sandbox along the central Euphrates river without
   getting access to the oil wells in the South and North....  The
   Americans should not play a role in all this.  A constitution dictated
   by the 'infidels' would have no chance.  The Iraqis must take time and
   live, if necessary, with an interim constitution for years.  But they
   must finally begin to take their fate into their own hands.  The
   starting signal was given yesterday."


   "Threatening"


   Birgit Cerah opined in an editorial in left-of-center Frankfurter
   Rundschau (8/26):  "Iraq's political power games are intensifying in
   their ugliness and their brutality.  But it was the discussion about
   the constitution, which was supposed to reconcile the ethnic groups
   that had fallen out with each other.  But the opposite has taken
   place.  The rows over federalism, Islam, and oil revenue have revealed
   the potential for a civil war.  Even the usually restrained Saudis are
   now admonishing their neighbors.  If a civil war begins in Iraq, then
   it will first influence Saudi Arabia.  The U.S. pressure to stick to a
   certain timetable...dramatically escalated the situation.  It requires
   wisdom and willingness for compromise to lead the country to democracy
   to save the unity of a country that was drafted on the colonial drawing
   board.  This also requires time, but the Iraqis...did not get this
   time....  A constitution without consensus promises an even worse
   situation or no future at all.  Nevertheless, many Sunnis are
   determined to express their 'no' not by using a gun but by going to the
   polls.  Even if this required a new beginning of the constitutional
   process, this setback would correspond with the will to use democratic
   means.  This alone is considerable progress."


   "Looks Like A Funeral"


   Right-of-center Rheinische Post of Düsseldorf (8/26) argued:  "This was
   a black day for Iraq, since it was characterized by a grave political
   defeat.  The vote on the constitutional draft was postponed for the
   third time, and this time to an undetermined day in the future.  This
   looks like the funeral for a document that was supposed to bring Iraq a
   charter for a free and peaceful co-existence.  The timetable is now
   getting mixed up.  It is in the stars when the interim constitution can
   be replaced by a final version that is accepted by all ethnic
   groups....  Thus far, it has mainly been Sunni terrorists, old Saddam
   cadres, and supporters of a Sunni-led Baath party have relied on the
   use of force.  They want to use all means possible means to prevent
   democratic improvements.  But now the violence is also breaking out
   among the Shiites.  Iraq is heading for a civil war."


   "The 'Period' Trap"


   Business daily Financial Times Deutschland of Hamburg (8/25) had this
   to say:  "In the drama about Iraq's future constitution... impatience
   could turn into a real danger.  President Bush urgently needs a success
   story for an increasingly skeptical public at home.  The official
   deadlines for the adoption of the constitution passed long ago and this
   is why pressure is mounting to end the case quickly and to postpone all
   open questions.  But this would be the false approach.  In the
   constitutional question, it is not swiftness that counts but mainly the
   quality of the compromises on the most important controversial
   questions....  Whatever the size of the current problems, no one should
   ever underestimate the historic dimension of this task and the enormous
   difficulties of all sides involved.  In Baghdad, a constitution must be
   worked out for a country that came into existence as a colonial
   artificial edifice, a country that does not have a democratic tradition
   nor models in its neighborhood....  Even under the most peaceful
   framework condition, it would be a Herculean task to settle these
   conflicts.  But in Baghdad, the environment is not peaceful:  Various
   groups are trying to prevent any stabilization by using force.  That is
   why it is all the more important to keep the political process alive.
   Leading Sunnis...are now calling upon their supporters to reject the
   constitution in the planned referendum in October.  This would be
   another bitter setback, but it also shows that civil war is not
   unavoidable.  Those who pin their hopes on the ballot boxes instead of
   arms have not yet written off a joint future."


   "Restless"


   Ulrich Ladurner opined in center-left weekly Die Zeit of Hamburg
   (8/25):  "It is difficult to side with the Sunni Arabs...but this is
   exactly necessary now.  The Iraqis are drafting their constitution, and
   it seems that the needs and interests of the Sunnis are ignored....
   Indeed, the planned federalization of Iraq provides the Kurds and
   Shiites with autonomous areas and the control the oil fields.  Kirkuk
   and Basra, not Baghdad, will be the names of the new centers of power.
   We could now certainly wonder whether this is wrong...but the answer is
   that Iraq will not have a future without Sunnis.  If they refuse to
   cooperate, Iraq will disintegrate.  Then it may be possible that Kurds
   and Shiites will control their areas including the oil resources, but
   they will not be happy with it.  For a disintegration will be bloody,
   no one will come to rest, irrespective of how many rights or oil he
   has."


   "Constitution"


   Dietrich Alexander opined in an editorial in right-of-center Die Welt
   of Berlin (8/24):  "It is [not?] a miracle that the Kurds and the
   Shiites have more or less reached an agreement on the future political
   structure of the country, since they want the same:  far-reaching
   autonomy and independence from the central government in Baghdad.  But
   this is what the Sunnis reject...and they have good reason to do
   so....  But the Sunnis may reject the federal structure as much as they
   can but they will be unable to prevent it if the population majority of
   the Shiites approves it and if the Kurds back them.  The Kurds
   established this [federal] system long ago under the allied protective
   shield.  For them, there is no alternative.  But Shiites and Kurds
   should not make the mistake to assert their constitutional draft over
   the Sunnis' head....  The Sunnis must be represented in a politically
   appropriate way and must get their share in the oil revenue of the
   country.  But before, they should give up their political boycott....
   This would deprive the foundations of Sunni terrorism under Zarkawi.
   In view of all this, time pressure from Washington is not useful, for
   at issue in Iraq is vital questions that will decisive for war and
   peace."


   "By Hook Or By Crook"


   Markus Ziener penned the following front-page editorial for business
   daily Handelsblatt of Duesseldorf (8/24):  "There are many reasons for
   strife in Iraq:  there is the artificially created U.S. time
   pressure....  there is the fact that the majority of Sunnis abstained
   from voting in the January elections and since they are dependent on
   the mercy of Kurds and Shiites, there is also the Sunni fear to go down
   in an Iraq where the Shiites have the majority.  All these are reasons
   to postpone a discussion over the constitution.  But in Iraq nothing is
   normal.  The United States wants to accomplish one thing:  to create
   facts.  If the military pacification of the country does not succeed,
   then political progress must be presentable.  Washington is even
   willing to accept a Shiite-Iranian dominance to achieve this goal.
   This gives us some indication of the White House's despair about the
   situation in Iraq.  But even Kurds and Shiites seem to be determined to
   assert their constitutional ideas against the Sunnis.  Against the
   historical background of a decade-long suppression by the Sunnis, this
   attitude is understandable.  A bad constitution is better than no
   constitution?  No, this view is wrong.  It would be another birth
   defect of the new Iraq.  The country would suffer, again and again."


   "Constitution"


   Center-right Hannoversche Allgemeine Zeitung (8/24) noted:  "Iraq is
   far away from being an anchor of stability in the Middle East.  The
   contrary is the case.  In the midst of this violence, a constitution is
   to be implanted which is supposed to keep the country together?  The
   constitution itself, in which the West rightfully pins much hope, has
   now turned into a bone of contention among the various ethnic groups.
   The Sunnis, who had the say under Saddam, have reason to fear that
   Kurds and Shiites will split oil revenue among themselves in a federal
   Iran and leave them on the rocks.  The character of the constitution,
   which is supposed to unite the people, will thus be reduced to
   absurdity."


   "Serious"


   Klaus-Dieter Frankenberger argued in center-right Frankfurter
   Allgemeine (8/24):  "Is the tough course of the debate over an Iraqi
   constitution really evidence, as skeptics on democracy in the Middle
   East argue, that the country can be governed only with a tough hand,
   i.e. with methods of a dictatorship?  It is true that fundamental
   differences have surfaced among the ethnic groups in the constitutional
   debate....  It is obvious that it will not be easy to find an agreement
   on it.  But those, including the ones in the United States, who declare
   the democracy experiment in Iraq a failure, should keep one thing in
   mind: there had been conflicts in the past, but under Saddam they were
   'settled' by displacing, suppressing or killing people....  Those who
   are impressed by the seriousness of the constitutional debate in light
   of terror have by no means been taken in by U.S. propaganda.  These
   attempts do exist like Washington's attempts to determine the course in
   Baghdad.  But you can look at it from whatever angle you like, Iraq
   will have a new face sooner or later."


   "America's Illusion"


   Tomas Avenarius judged in center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich
   (8/24):  "Iraq is not a historically grown country.  It is an
   artificial product that came into existence through borders drawn by
   the mandatory powers after WWI; and they did not show any consideration
   for ethnic and religious particularities.  This is now coming back to
   haunt [the Americans]....  Saddam's dictatorship kept this edifice
   together.  The federal and democratic republic, which the United States
   is striving for has not yet created this unity....  The constitutional
   draft will hardly get the approval by the Sunnis in October.  They have
   no incentive to accept it, since they are excluded from power.  This
   means that disintegration is looming....  The beneficiaries would be
   the Kurds who have dreamt for years about their own state.  The other
   winner would be Iran.  A Shiite government in southern Iraq...will seek
   proximity with Shiite Iran.  This is all the more so since Iranian
   politicians already have a certain control over the Shiite parties in
   Iraq.  Thus the mullah regime, which the United States has grimly
   fought for 25 years, could be the real beneficiary of George W. Bush's
   policy."


   "Holidays From War"


   Business daily Financial Times Deutschland of Hamburg (8/23)
   editorialized:  "President Bush calls his policy towards Iraq
   'strategy' but it is increasingly the attempt to hush up a failure.
   The shyness to accept reality may be understandable in view of the
   disastrous situation in Iraq.  Some events remind Americans of their
   most painful wound in their mind:  Vietnam.  At that time, people
   departed from Washington with power illusions.  But the withdrawal also
   had a totally different meaning.  Today, it would not only be
   confession of a defeat.  The implications for Iraq and the entire
   Middle East and for the international security situation would be
   disastrous.  To the extent to which calls in the United States for a
   withdrawal are getting louder, President Bush should counter such
   appeals.  But he is shying away from assuming responsibility for his
   incomplete democratization work.  A withdrawal is no reasonable
   alternative, and a dramatic extension of the military presence is
   hardly imaginable in view of the mood in the United States and the
   problems to recruit people either.  That is why it is all the more
   important that Bush explains how he wants to get out of the confused
   situation.  Among the many bad alternatives an unpopular reinforcement
   of the forces and thus a possibly more active strategy in the hunt for
   insurgents seems to be the best alternative.  But this change of
   strategy would result in even more U.S. victims.  No wonder that Bush
   prefers to go on vacation instead of talking plain English."


   ITALY:  "A Missed Opportunity"


   Aldo Rizzo commented in centrist, influential La Stampa (8/29):  "This
   Iraqi Constitution risks remaining a theoretical document, a missed
   opportunity or worse, triggering a civil war that is, after all,
   already creeping up....  The dispute is not doctrinaire, it does not
   affect, except in a minor way, the aspects of a possible democratic
   future.  Rather it concerns the central crux of power, its distribution
   among the three ethnic groups, and a power that signifies the sole
   control and great wealth of the country, oil....  The Sunnis can block
   the popular referendum in the middle of October, winning only
   two-thirds of the votes in three of eight provinces....  Or
   alternatively, they could nullify popular consultation, further
   extending the homicidal and suicidal violence.  If these extreme
   hypotheses were realized, the 'democratic process', instead of being or
   appearing to be the only plausible justification for Bush's war against
   Saddam, would be the detonator of an even greater crisis that could
   definitively blow up Iraq (and its surroundings)."


   "A Slap In The Face To The U.S."


   Bernardo Valli asserted in left-leaning, influential la Repubblica
   (8/29):  "The American forceps did not work.  They have not managed to
   draw a unanimous consensus from the Iraqi mix of the three large
   communities on the text of the Constitution, to submit to a referendum
   next October.  An indispensable consensus in order to advance the
   political process, on whose success Iraqi victory is dependent....  The
   operation, intended to provide this volcanic country with a democratic
   Constitution, is ambitious and praiseworthy.  It is titanic.  One does
   not often see such an event...in the Middle East.  But the idea of
   being able to deliver a democracy from the Iraqi reality, using a force
   composed of the most historically modern and powerful nations as a
   forceps, appeared risky from the beginning.  You can understand why
   Bush would defend it....  And he is in hurry to realize it.  Since the
   original objective of annihilating the threat of weapons of mass
   destruction, which were revealed to be nonexistent, vanished, the U.S.
   President wants to demonstrate that the three years of military
   adventure, in spite of the large human, political, and moral cost,
   served to set Iraq on a path towards democracy."


   "Iranian Specter On Constitution"


   An article on the front page of elite, center-left daily Il Riformista
   (8/26) commented:  "The re-explosion of the clash in the Shiite camp
   has...to do with the constitution.  Sadr, who has always been close to
   the more radical Iranian segments, is apparently in favor of a
   constitution that offers a federalist outlet to a future Shiite region
   inevitably bound to gravitate toward Iran....  The new constitution is
   bringing all the unresolved issues of the Iraqi transition to light.
   The hastiness of the White House, determined to continue quickly with
   the exit strategy, was not beneficial.  The sole objective of the
   constitutional agreement should not have been the difficult and
   necessary compromise between the Shiites and Kurds...but it should have
   also aimed at dividing the Sunni alignment....  American contacts with
   the insurgents in recent months aimed exactly at that.  Washington's
   endorsement of a text that severely punishes the Sunnis, reunites all
   the components in a new `front of refusal.'  It is a dangerous move
   because, despite internal divisions, this time the Sunnis will
   vote....  The Sunni reaction could not have been but negative.  The
   highly influential Council of the Ulemas claims that the new
   constitution presages the division and explosion of the country, and
   refuses to recognize it as legitimate."


   "A Theocratic Iraq"


   Giuliana Sgrena, former Italian hostage in Iraq, commented in Communist
   Il Manifesto (8/25):  "Bush's new ultimatum, the approval of the
   constitution to maintain the timetable established by the U.S. before
   the departure of CPA Paul Bremer, is quickly leading Iraq toward a
   Lebanon-like situation....  The entire process, which was triggered by
   the war and the occupation, is leading the country adrift, beginning
   with the power vacuum created when foreign armies overthrew Saddam's
   regime.  Iraq is a country in which no laws are in effect, that must be
   rebuilt from its foundation and that must give itself its own forms of
   democracy following decades of a bloody dictatorial regime, while it
   had to approve a constitution in record time (three months!)--something
   that can only work in Washington.  So the land of Babylonia...had to
   accept a constitution imposed by the new U.S. Ambassador to
   Baghdad....  In order to `export democracy,' Bush has created a new
   Shiite Islamic state ally of Tehran just when he is on a collision
   course with Tehran.  The laity--Kurds, Shiites, Sunni--and the
   minorities are fundamentally excluded from a process that should
   guarantee democratization....  The Sunnis boycotted the elections
   because they were taking place under occupation, but now they are
   signing up...for the referendum on the constitution....  While the
   elections in January...were clearly a false move--elections in
   themselves do not represent democracy, especially if they exclude 20
   per cent of the population--the approval of the constitution without
   the Sunnis' approval is even worse because it jeopardizes the future of
   the country and a Lebanonization is certainly not desirable, although
   it currently appears inevitable."


   "Saddam's Shadow Disrupts Enactment Of The Constitution"


   Gabriel Bertinetto in pro-Democratic Left Party (DS) l'Unita (8/25):
   "Since the end of the dictatorship, the Sunnis live in fear of complete
   marginalization....  Acknowledging that they are only 20% of the
   population, they fear remaining crushed in a mechanism of political and
   institutional reorganization that may not coincide with the democratic
   process label given by the Americans....  When in the articles proposed
   by Shiites and Kurds there appears `any organization that adopts a
   racist, terrorist, extremist, or partisan ideology with particular
   reference to Saddam's Baathist party,' it alarms them and they
   protest.  Not for the love of the tyrant, but because they interpret
   the explicit mention of the former party as the source of enduring
   future ostracism in the clash of these hundreds of thousands, if not
   millions, of people who accepted the Baath party during Saddam's time,
   and because of this, by one of the most senseless American decisions,
   they lost their job in a liberated and occupied Iraq.  Everyone, not
   only the hierarchy and accomplices of the crimes committed by Saddam."


   "Iraq, Shiites Decided: Tomorrow We Will Approve New Constitution"


   Fausto Biloslavo noted in pro-government, leading center-right Il
   Giornale (8/24):  "The tug-of-war over the Iraqi constitution
   continues, with the Shiites determined to vote on it in Parliament
   without changes, the Sunnis threatening a civil war and the Kurds in
   the middle....  According to President Bush, the Iraqi people have
   already changed, with respect to a past dictatorship, by preparing the
   draft constitution.  The White House chief is urging the Iraqis to
   reach a consensus among all of the factions, but warns: `The Sunnis
   must choose.  Do they want to live in a free society or amidst
   violence?'"


   "Sunnis Have Final Say On Constitution"


   Michele Farina observed in centrist, top-circulation Corriere della
   Sera (8/24):  "Article 2 in the constitution presented the other night
   in Baghdad's Parliament defines the political system as follows:
   `Republican, parliamentary, democratic and federal.'  The Sunnis are
   against federalism.  They are afraid it will divide the country: They
   fear losing the oil that is found almost entirely in the Shiite South
   and Kurdish North....  The Sunnis are already thinking about a
   referendum and a way to rebuff the draft constitution....  A
   referendum.  Like in Switzerland.  The people will decide.  The only
   thing is that this is Iraq."


   "Baghdad's Hidden Fiesta"


   Magdi Allam in centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera (8/23):
   "It is an eleventh hour compromise to attempt to obtain the adherence
   of the Sunni minority to the founding act of the new free and
   democratic Iraqi state, approved by the majority of Shiites and Kurds
   who hold 215 out of 275 parliamentary seats....  The Sunnis' real
   problem is the oppressive conditioning by Saddamist and Binladian
   terrorist groups....  In any event, the day after tomorrow we will have
   the official text of the draft of the new Constitution, proof of the
   Iraqis' determined will for freedom and democracy.  Now we must only
   hope that we--in Italy, in Europe and in the West--will open both our
   eyes once and for all and see Iraq's reality for what it is, not for
   what we imagine it to be with the ideological filters that...depict a
   succession of terrorist attacks as what some are still qualifying...as
   acts of `resistance.'"


   "Iraq, The First Agreement Between Shiites And Kurds"


    Alberto Negri in leading business daily Il Sole-24 Ore (8/23):  "The
   new Constitution describes Iraq as `a republican, parliamentary,
   democratic, and federal state,' but for what filtered through
   yesterday, the document...is still an imprecise description on an
   autonomous level of the various federalist components....  These
   problems seem to be unresolved in the constitutional draft and Islam's
   role is still not clear.  It is true that Islam becomes one of the
   sources of legislation, a common factor in a majority of Muslim
   States....  The real question is what will be, amid the influence of
   religious autonomists and fundamentalists, the material application of
   the new Constitution that will go into effect only after the popular
   referendum on October 15.  However, we must make two observations:
   This document was written in a war zone, in a country constantly on the
   verge of civil conflict.  Thus, the writing of the draft shows itself
   to be a process that has divided instead of unified the three principal
   Iraqi components.  Maybe all of this was inevitable, but in the
   meantime, while parties and constituents discuss, very little has been
   done to halt the collapse of the Iraqi State and its civil society."


   "Federal Oil"


   Boris Biancheri in centrist, influential daily La Stampa (8/23):  "The
   Americans are more or less discretely piloting the process (thanks also
   to their active Ambassador to Baghdad of Iraqi origin) and finding
   themselves in a dilemma.  Typically more favorable to the federal
   formula which is closer to their own concept of democracy and in any
   case is supported, other than by the Kurds, also by authoritarian
   Shiite influences, they realize that the greater the federalism, the
   greater the individual rights will be....  In the final phases, the
   Americans are pushing for it to be done quickly.  It is
   understandable.  The start of a democratic process has until now been
   the only positive factor in such a disastrous war."


   "A Providential Draft"


   An article in elite, center-left daily Il Riformista (8/23):
   "Everything leaves one to believe that the agreement was reached more
   by forcing through ongoing differences in order to avoid another delay
   in the deadline for the agreement, rather than succeed in the attempt
   to approve a genuinely shared solution among the three areas of the
   country and the dozens of political parties that really count.  Knowing
   that Tehran has again begun rooting for intransigence, and how
   sharpness of the claws of the numerous Sunni insurgents, it is too
   early to toast to victory."

   RUSSIA:  "Sunni Overboard"


   Reformist Vremya Novostey quoted Georgiy Mirskiy of the International
   Relations and World Economy Institute (8/29):  "Sunni politicians--the
   most active and wily ones--are out to sink the constitution in
   October.  Despite the many concessions made to them, they deliberately
   exaggerate problems related to federalism.  Clearly, the Sunnis would
   like the elections to strengthen their position considerably.  They
   boycotted last January's vote and are determined to make up for it by
   thoroughly preparing for the new elections.  It is not ruled out that
   the Sunni will come to terms with the majority Shia...killing the idea
   of federalism, with the Kurds hurt the most."


   "A Boundless Constitution"


   Vladimir Bogdanov stated in official Rossiyskaya Gazeta (8/29):  "Many
   experts fear the current shaky compromise is no ultimate solution to
   the problem of an Iraqi constitution.  The probability that the draft
   basic law will not survive the referendum is quite high.  It will not
   if the three central Sunni-dominated provinces vote against it.   There
   is no unity among the Shiia either."


   "Draft Grants Kurdish, Shia Autonomy"


   Alexander Samokhotkin commented in reformist Vremya Novostei (8/24):
   "The draft was the result of accords reached by the Kurds and Shia
   religious leaders controlling 225 out of 275 seats in the National
   Assembly.  It takes account of far from all demands by Sunnis (only
   having 17 seats in parliament), who used to be a privileged minority
   under Saddam Hussein....  The name of the future state--the Republic of
   Iraq--does not contain the words 'Islamic' (on which the Shia initially
   insisted) and 'federative' (which Kurds wanted).  Still the draft
   fundamental law defines the state as a parliamentary federation, in
   which Kurds and Shia would have autonomy.  Sunnis dislike this.  They
   have threatened the United States by the prospect of the emergence of a
   Shia state in southern Iraq--close to the borders of Shia Iran, so much
   hated by Washington....  To ease differences, the draft will contain a
   provision reading that oil revenues will be distributed among regions
   in proportion to their population.  This is a serious concession by
   Kurds to Sunni Arabs making one-third of Iraqis.  Kurds make 20 percent
   of the country's population and initially wanted 65 percent of oil
   revenues....  U.S. Ambassador Zalmai Khalilzad has noted that Sunnis'
   participation in the preparation of the Constitution is very important,
   because it is impossible to defeat combatants by military means alone.
   It is worth noting that Sunnis make a majority among Iraqi rebels."


   "Without A Constitution"


   Vladimir Bogdanov wrote in the official government Rossiiskaya Gazeta
   (8/23):  "If the Iraqis fail to agree on a Constitution, the country
   will be back to square one.  The National Assembly would be dissolved.
   And it would be anyone's guess in what direction things would move.  To
   start everything from scratch?  But this is not in the interests of the
   Americans or the Iraqis.  The first to suffer from such a decision
   would be the image of the U.S. and the current administration.  Last
   year Washington was jubilant that the plan for Iraq had been approved
   and accepted by the international community....  Now it risks drawing a
   blank.  If things collapse now, it means all their efforts had been in
   vain and the withdrawal of American troops will become highly
   problematic.  The White House is so eager to see an early adoption of
   the Constitution that it has even dropped its objections to the role of
   Islam in Iraq.  Washington has agreed that Islam would be declared one
   of the 'sources' in the development of new legislation.  That is a huge
   concession on the part of the U.S."


   AUSTRIA:  "Time Is Running Out For Iraq"


   Commentator for centrist Die Presse Helmut Dumbs opined (8/24):  "'We
   cannot please everybody,' says Iraq's Shiite President Ibrahim
   al-Jafari. What that means is:  If the Sunnis do not accept our
   constitutional draft, we won't bother any more.  After all, the draft
   can pass the parliamentary hurdle with a comfortable Shiite Kurdish
   majority--however, there is the danger that it will be rejected in a
   referendum in the core Sunni provinces.  Then the tedious process would
   have to begin again.  Time, however, is running out for Iraq.  The
   circle of violence that has been set in motion by Sunni rebels, Shiite
   militia, and government-affiliated death squadrons is spinning out of
   control, the danger of a civil war is looming.  If the situation keeps
   deteriorating, one thing could prove to be an advantage:  The fact that
   the state whose constitution is currently the bone of contention, will
   soon no longer exist.  The gamble for federalism and oil is a dangerous
   one.  Some Iraqi politicians seem to accept that. However, a wildfire
   could also sweep them away."


   "Dead End"


   Foreign affairs editor Gudrun Harrer commented in independent Der
   Standard  (8/24):  "The truth is that there is not even a clear
   definition of what exactly is being discussed....  What next?  At the
   moment, all scenarios are more or less bad.  If the Iraqi parties
   should manage to agree on a joint draft, the best that can be hoped for
   is that its wording is such as not to aggravate the problems.  The word
   `federal' in the draft will solve nothing.  If a clear definition is to
   be postponed to a future date, specific mechanisms and procedures of
   how this is to be done will have to be worked out beforehand.  However,
   the participants are still far from having reached that point.  All
   unresolved issues will eventually be dealt with in a parliamentary
   process.  This, however, would create just the kind of situation that
   the consensual approach was supposed to avoid:  In that case, the
   parties would not be sitting at the same table as equal partners, but
   according to their parliamentary majority.  This is the reason why the
   Arab Sunnis have such a hard time agreeing to a sketchy draft like the
   one presented on Monday.  The worst thing, however, is the fact that
   the definitions are already being worked out on the ground, and that
   means bloodshed--more than is reported by the media.  After all, no
   journalists are present when Shiite Badr militia and Sunni tribes are
   fighting each other in the south of Baghdad."


   "A Federal, Islamic Future For Iraq?"


   The center-left Irish Times (8/24) commented:  "Political
   representatives of Iraq's Sunni Muslim minority have until tomorrow to
   sign up to a draft constitution agreed earlier this week by the
   country's two other major ethnic groupings--the Shias and Kurds.  It
   seems unlikely that the (mainly Sunni) insurgents will go along with
   what is being proposed.  The stage is thus set for continuing, if not
   accelerating, bloodshed in the run-up to a referendum on the
   constitution, scheduled for October, and elections to form a new
   government, scheduled for December....  On the key issue of federalism
   and resources, the constitution seeks to strike a careful balance in
   which key powers are centralized but resources are not pillaged from
   the regions by central government....  Thus the constitution seeks to
   devolve power and responsibility from Baghdad, while simultaneously
   imposing a partnership between central and regional government.
   Sunnis, who formed the backbone of Saddam's dictatorship, do not like
   all of this.  Shias and Kurds, who make up the overwhelming bulk of the
   population, have achieved much of what they wanted.  But it is in their
   interest, and the interest of everyone outside Iraq, that the
   constitution receives the widest possible endorsement if Iraqis are to
   have any chance of stabilizing their country and living in peace."


   "Fighting About Oil And Power"


   Foreign affairs editor for mass circulation daily Kuirer Livia Klingl
   opined (8/23):  "The U.S. has seriously blundered in Iraq.  Instead of
   a modern, secular democracy with a strong center that is going to
   impact despotic states and religious dictatorships in the region, Iraq
   is going to become a religious construct with a weak center and strong
   centrifugal forces based on the power of clans--a political construct
   that physically can be compared to a washing machine without a door
   and, from a religious point of view, resembles one of the members of
   the axis of evil, Iran.  Islam will not simply be one of the sources of
   jurisprudence in Iraq, it will be a chief source--and that, despite
   assertions to the contrary voiced by the U.S. before, during, and after
   the war, means that the situation of women will deteriorate
   considerably.  These tendencies are mostly good news for the regional
   power Iran....  First, Washington bombed the Iranian mullahs' biggest
   enemies from power, the Taliban, who wanted to establish a state that
   was to be even more Islamic than Iran.  Then, the Americans did the
   same with Iran's second-biggest enemy, Saddam Hussein, who, like
   Teheran, for years entertained ambitions of becoming a hegemonic
   power.  True, Iran is currently under international observance on
   account of its nuclear politics.  On the domestic side, however, the
   hardliners' power is cemented.  And in the region, Teheran has achieved
   its goals.  Quite in contrast to the U.S., which, at best, can gloss
   over the mess it has gotten itself into."


   BELGIUM:  "Complete Deadlock"


   Foreign editor Paul De Bruyn wrote in conservative Christian-Democrat
   Gazet van Antwerpen (8/27):  "Two and a half years after the American
   invasion and the fall of Saddam Iraq is more divided than ever.  That
   artificial country had always been divided, but the Americans' mistakes
   have only amplified that rift.  Not much is needed today to make the
   nightmare scenario become reality: civil war.  The impasse over the
   Constitution may ignite the fuse....  The Americans are exerting a lot
   of pressure on the Iraqis to make them solve their problems, but they
   can only wait and see.  They no longer have a grip on the events.  More
   and more they have to fear that their intervention in Iraq will lead to
   the creation of a fundamentalist regime.  That would be the complete
   failure of their policy."


   "Hoping For Iraqi Exception"


   Foreign editor Jean Vanempten commented in financial daily De Tijd
   (8/27):  "In the Arab world there are no successful federal states.
   There is a natural trend towards strongly centralized states with firm
   leaderships--which often do not operate democratically.  Iraq can be an
   exception and even play a pioneering role in the Middle East.  That is
   what the strategists in the White House are hoping, but that scenario
   does not take the Iraqi reality into account.  Whatever Constitution is
   presented to the Iraqi people in October, or even later, it will not
   remove the deep division.  It is clear that the political leadership in
   Baghdad receives only little support from the people and that makes a
   political solution difficult.  Hopefully, the Iraqis will find a viable
   compromise"


   IRELAND:  "Bush On The Back Foot"


   The center right, populist Irish Independent editorialized (8/25):
   "Negotiations for a new Iraqi constitution, due to conclude today, are
   revealing the forces that threaten to tear the country apart....  At
   face value, a federal system for a country that is basically three
   countries in one would seem to make sense.  However, it doesn't make
   sense to the Sunnis because they know that the oil wealth of Iraq,
   which they exploited for decades, is located mainly in the regions
   where Kurds and Shias are dominant.  For this reason they fear that a
   federal Iraq will leave them impoverished and means they want
   guarantees that they will have a share of the oil revenue that is the
   basis of Iraq's economy.  These issues will not be easy to resolve, but
   is absolutely vital that a constitution which is more or less
   acceptable to all three of the main communities in Iraq be agreed, and
   then passed by the people later this year.  The alternative, which is
   possibly a Balkans-style conflagration, is too awful to contemplate."


   NORWAY:  "Iraq's Uneasy Future"


   The newspaper-of-record Aftenposten (8/30) commented:  "'We will help
   the Iraqi people to establish a peaceful and democratic country in the
   heart of the Middle East.  And by doing this, we will defend our people
   against danger.'  This is how President George W. Bush formulated his
   grand strategic goal for Iraq in a speech in London in November
   2003....  [But] Iraq is far from peaceful.  Democracy...also seems a
   distant goal.  The draft constitution...does not make the goal more
   achievable.  Since the Sunnis refuse to accept it, an important
   precondition for peace and democracy in Iraq is missing....  The
   situation can lead to continued war and unrest, regardless of whether
   the Americans pull out and leave the Iraqis themselves to make
   decisions.  Because the question...is:  who are the Iraqis?  Is there a
   common denominator for the three groups, one on which it is possible to
   build an independent, peaceful, and successful state?....  [In the Arab
   world there are not at present any examples of successful
   decentralized, multiethnic and multi-religious states.  The revenge
   motive--Kurds and Shias were oppressed by Saddam Hussein and his
   Sunni-dominated Baath Party--is still strong.  And the Sunnis have
   contributed to weakening their own position by refusing until now to be
   part of the political process....  [But] the work on the constitution
   may still have had a positive effect.  The only way Sunnis can avoid
   the adoption of the Constitution is by voting in the referendum on
   October 15.  If they vote against it, that is negative.  But
   participation is at least a positive contribution to the democratic
   process in Iraq.  This is one of very few encouraging aspects [of the
   situation in Iraq]."


   "Four Years In Iraq"


   Independent newspaper VG (8/23) commented:  "U.S. Army Chief of Staff
   Peter Schoomaker says that more than 10,000 U.S. soldiers could remain
   in Iraq for four more years.  In that case, many will return home in a
   coffin.  Those who compare [the war in Iraq] to the war in Vietnam
   could be right:  The longer the Americans remain in Iraq, the more
   problems they will have."


   POLAND:  "Iraq Still Without Constitution"


   Jacek Przybylski wrote in centrist Rzeczpospolita (8/23):  "The draft
   constitution was made ready at the last moment by the Shiites and the
   Kurds. Together, the groups have 215 of the 275 seats in the
   Parliament.  Thus, if they decided to force the draft at any cost, they
   would probably succeed. They gave up the idea, though, faced with
   strong resistance from the Arab Sunni.  The latter constitute a
   decisive minority--both in the country and in the Parliament--but to
   work out a constitution without their approval would only further
   destabilize the situation in Iraq.  America's hope for curbing
   terrorism might then prove futile."


   ROMANIA:  "Is There A Victory Strategy For Iraq?"


   In the pro-Democratic Convention and Civic Alliance Romania Libera
   (8/24) journalist Cristian Campeanu opined:  "Between the left and
   right wings in America, there is a dialogue of the deaf that is highly
   unlikely to result in a solution.  The reasons are, first and foremost,
   of an ideological nature and have very little to do with Iraq
   itself....  Leaving Iraq in the hands of Bin Laden, Al Zarqawi and
   Moqtada Sadr is like a bullet to the head of the Western civilization.
   From this point of view, Bush is right in saying that there is no
   alternative to victory.  The problem though continues to be the way in
   which they get there....  The political regime that would reconcile
   democracy with sharia does not exist yet.  And sending 2,000 people out
   there to die in order to have a Taliban regime next to an Iranian-like
   theocracy, instead of Saddam Hussein, that would be the real definition
   of defeat."


   SPAIN:  "The Iraqi Fracture"


   centrist La Vanguardia opined (8/30): "The White House 'is proud' of
   the agreement, but it is still to be seen if it is translated into
   political and security normalization that allows for the retreat of
   American troops... Far from political calculations, the writing of the
   Constitution has brought up question marks on two key points: the
   definition of Islam as 'a main source of legislation,' and the federal
   structure of a State that institutionalizes Kurdish autonomy in the
   north and opens the door to the creation of a Shiite region in the
   south, the two major oil reserve zones. The result could turn Iraq,
   once a dictatorial State, into a fractured and failed State, and put
   the Shiite territory under the influence of the theocratic Iranian
   State. The process of democratization, in summary, could turn into an
   internal failure and the rise of an Islamic regime where before there
   was none, a risk that could boomerang against its promoters."


   "Iraq And Federalism"


   Conservative ABC (8/26) editorialized:  "Not much imagination was
   needed to know by intuition...that Saddam Hussein's defeat would lead
   to the collapse of the Iraqi state....   And, according to the
   circumstances, that collapse would finish in a federal-independent
   leaning and Islamic system....  In addition to the threat of a civil
   war, federalism would bring with it international tensions not to be
   ignored....  The options are not promising.  They can't be.  The U.S.
   got into this war with post-war plans so naive they seem perverse.
   The 'democratic process for the new Iraq' will end in the practical
   disintegration of the country, under the shadow of a possible civil war
   and armed regional conflict.  A worrying balance."


   "Iraq, A Rough Draft"


   Left-of-center El País declared (8/24):  "More than being at the end of
   negotiations for a democratic (Iraqi) Constitution, it could be said
   that the political forces...are in the last stage of a peace process.
   And, to a large extent, the budding Constitution is that: an attempt to
   avoid a break down in Iraq leading to civil war....  If the General
   Assembly approves the project, Iraq will have taken a decisive step
   towards democracy, but it also has shown its weakness as a state and
   its conversion to Islamic tendencies, something that was not in the
   general plans of the Bush administration when it invaded the
   country....  Plunged into violence and chaos, the country is like its
   Constitution: a rough draft.  An agreement that includes the Sunnis,
   although improbable, is an indispensable condition (although it may not
   be enough) to reduce violence in the country.  A lack of agreement will
   fuel (violence).  In any case, with this draft, Iraq will not be
   transformed into a light of democracy and modernity for the rest of the
   Arab and Muslim world as proclaimed by Washington.  Despite of the
   'total victory' Bush says he is pursuing, it will be shaped by much
   less."


   TURKEY:  "A Federal Iraq"


   Kamuran Ozbir wrote in the nationalist Ortadogu (8/29):  "Is Iraq
   turning into a federal system?  Federalism is a democratic method, but
   nothing is clear as far as the future of Iraq is concerned....  Even if
   the constitution is approved by the people during the upcoming
   referendum, the problems will remain.  The constitution in its current
   form has loopholes that will create many problems along the way.  The
   constitution will not help the Shiites and Kurds to act together.  Due
   to its theocratic structure shaped to favor Shiite demands, the Iraqi
   constitution may lay the ground for the Kurds to split off from Iraq
   even if it passes at referendum.  The continuing violence is another
   major problem for the future of Iraq.  The U.S. may decide to pull out
   due to the increase in terrorist acts.  If so, Iraq may end up as a
   field of conflict between Shiites and Sunnis.  The new constitution in
   Iraq is not the end of the story.  In fact, the genuine struggle in
   Iraq is beginning right now."


   "Iraq's Constitution"


   Erhan Basyurt wrote in the Islamist-intellectual Zaman (8/26):  "The
   new Iraqi constitution was drafted by the Shiites and the Kurds, while
   objections from the Sunnis were ignored.  At this point, fundamental
   changes to the text seem unlikely.  The constitutional draft includes
   advanced standards on freedom and minority rights.  It accepts Arabic
   and Kurdish as the two official languages, and paves the way for
   Kurdish language education in a federal region of Kurdistan....  Other
   minorities, such as Turkmens and Assyrians, are not ignored either.
   Their right to education in their mother tongue will be allowed upon
   request....  It is also important that the Iraqi constitution defines a
   good structure with regard to the relationship between the state and
   religion.  The constitution accepts Islam as the state's official
   religion, but rules out the passage of any law which is against both
   Islam and democracy.  In other words, Iraq will not be a religious
   state, and a conflict between the state and religion is prevented....
   The main issue about the new constitution is the extent to which it
   will really be implemented, even if it is approved by the people of
   Iraq.  The constitution, in its current form, could bring chaos to Iraq
   in the short term, because Iraq does not have a deeply-rooted
   democratic experience.  On the contrary, Iraq presents a complex
   picture with its competing ethnic, linguistic, and religious
   groupings.  Given the impact of tribal culture in daily life and the
   low level of education, Iraq may not continue to sail toward freedom,
   but may find itself in chaos and under pressure from divisive forces.
   Deferring the status of Kirkuk until 2007 is another potential problem
   for Iraq's future....  Under its new constitution, Iraq is designed to
   be a model for the region.  Let's hope that it will not end up being
   dragged into a chaos of freedom."


   "Bush's Democracy"


   Turker Alkan commented in liberal-intellectual Radikal (8/24):  "The
   ethnic groups in Iraq could not agree on a draft constitution.  They
   have different views on key issues such as secularism, federalism, and
   the distribution of oil revenues.  Could this kind of administration be
   called a democracy?  I really don't know.  But it is obvious that a
   political organization based on religion will cause problems in the
   future for secular countries like the U.S. and Turkey.  The United
   States won the war.  That was easy.  But if it continues like this, the
   U.S. will lose the peace.  It is obvious that the U.S. didn't plan
   sufficiently on the question of who would replace Saddam.  This
   represents a big loss of prestige for a superpower like the U.S....
   Even though the U.S. has a huge military force in Iraq, there is no
   guarantee that terrorism will come to an end after they leave.
   Democracy and the rule of law can never be established through fiat.
   If only they could be."


   MIDDLE EAST


   ISRAEL:  "Iraq Is Not A State Anymore"


   Hebrew University Professor of Political Science and former Foreign
   Ministry director-general Shlomo Avineri wrote in conservative,
   independent Jerusalem Post (8/23):  "There is no way of putting
   Humpty-Dumpty together again.  The Kurds and the Shi'ites will go their
   separate ways, and both entities have the paramilitary capability to do
   so.  There is no Iraqi army capable of maintaining the unity of the
   country.  And, just as in the former Yugoslavia, the separate
   countries--Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia--have a better chance of creating
   coherent and democratic systems than the old coercive Yugoslavia, the
   same may apply to Iraq....  The U.S. will obviously have to change its
   policy over Iraq--maybe this is what President George W. Bush is
   devoting his vacation to.  It would be advisable to think outside the
   box and realize that Iraq is not a country anymore.  This is not the
   end of the world, but it calls for courageous and creative thinking
   about alternatives."


   SAUDI ARABIA:  "Iraq's Divisions"


   Riyadh's moderate Al-Jazira editorialized (8/30):  "The battle of the
   Iraqi constitution has not yet been completely settled.  In other
   words, there is still an opportunity to contain its possibly dangerous
   ramifications and to open room for efforts by sincere national powers.
   The developments related to the Iraqi constitution have greatly shocked
   the Arab world.  The constitution offered a completely different form
   of Iraq and its affiliations in the Arab world."

   "Iraqis Unity"


   Abha's moderate Al-Watan editorialized (8/28):  "There are fears that
   the issue of the constitution will turn into a point of sharp
   disagreement.  The Iraqis will forget the issue of ending the
   occupation and the country will enter into a cycle of endless
   violence....  The collapse of the former regime whetted the appetite of
   many Iraqis to call for similar arrangements to Kurdistan....  The
   danger in such calls is based on sect and race in the absence of a
   strong central government that can resolve issues quickly....  There
   are demonstrations rejecting the constitution--mainly federalism.  This
   is an indication that the Iraqi people realize the danger of the coming
   phase of their history.


   "The Iraqi Identity"


   Jeddah's conservative Al-Madinah commented (8/28):  "The Sunnis have
   the key to stability in Iraq.  That was an indirect message from
   President Bush to the constitution committee.  Secretary Rice urged the
   Iraqi leadership to increase the number of Sunnis in the committee.
   There is fear and bitterness in the entire Arab world.  There is fear
   that Iraq with its Arabic history and culture may lose its Arab
   identity.  There are also fears of a civil war that will bring Iraq to
   an unknown future."


   "Sectarian Trend In Iraq"


   Jeddah's conservative Al-Nadwa editorialized (8/25):  "The country is
   occupied, the security, social, economic and institutional systems have
   been destroyed; yet there are people in Iraq who want to introduce a
   federal system.  Introduction of a federal system in Iraq is a step
   backward as it is based on religious sectarianism.  Despite these
   worries, the Kingdom's hopes, as a neighbor and brother to Iraq, are
   still for the Iraqi people to work hard on unity so that they can
   protect their rights and ensure the future of their children.


   "A Dark Destiny"


   Jeddah's moderate Okaz editorialized (8/25):  "Iraqis may and may not
   approve the constitution, it is their right to construct the future of
   their country, but things look more sensitive and dangerous than
   expected.  A united Iraq under the umbrella of a federal system is not
   possible; the result will be dangerous and destructive.  A federal
   system based on race and religious sectarianism will get Iraq and the
   entire region into a disastrous future.  Iraqis are required to put the
   unity of Iraq on top of their priorities in order to avoid destructive
   results for the entire region.


   "Caution About An Imported Constitution"


   Abha's moderate Al-Watan editorialized (8/23):  "There are fears about
   attempts of some Iraqi political and religious leaders to impose
   imported proposals on the draft of the new Iraqi constitution, which
   will lead to separation, a federal system and empowerment of certain
   religious leaders....   There are some hidden powers, which support
   such proposals to exclude the Iraqi Arab Sunnis and others in the new
   Iraq after Saddam Hussein.


   "Towards Iraqi Reconciliation"


   Riyadh's conservative Al-Jaziara editorialized (8/22):  "Kurds are
   ready to relinquish self-determination in line with a collective
   willingness of the Iraqi sects....  The demands for federalism made the
   Kurds realize that there is a danger threatening the country....
   Sunnis rejected federalism as did a large percent of Shiite.  The
   current discussions have achieved reconciliation in many respects....
   This reconciliation will make the occupation realize that it can leave
   the country."


   "Iraq, Country Of National Unity Or Diaspora"


    Riyadh's conservative Al-Riyadh editorialized (8/21):  "The
   probabilities give us hope that wars have made Iraqis mature....  The
   deliberate destruction carried out by terrorists and the demonstrations
   in Kirkuk, calling for making it for all sects, give us a reason that
   Iraq has the competence to exit from the crises....  Iraq for all
   Iraqis should be more successful than divided states.  The U.S. should
   realize that if it favors one party then it is fixing its policies
   rather than changing its interests.


   IRAQ:  "Achievement And Victory"

   Al-Bayyan (8/29) (affiliated with the Islamic A-Da'wa Party led by
   Al-Ja'afari) declared:  "Yesterday, the Iraqi people felt pleased about
   the endorsement of the draft constitution.  This ratification came
   after three days of discussions and meetings to solve all pending
   issues.  After that, we are now waiting for referendum day... All the
   political parties and blocs in the National Assembly have made
   concerted efforts to ensure that all Iraqi sects participated in the
   constitutional process.  They gave those who boycotted elections a
   chance to participate in this process for the sake of drafting a united
   constitution.  However, some groups tried to impose their conditions at
   the expenses of others and this has led to a delay in settling pending
   issues.  It was possible to solve these issues through voting in the
   National Assembly yet the parliamentary blocs ignored that option and
   preferred negotiating in a way that satisfied all groups... We think
   that the endorsement of the draft constitution is a significant
   achievement and victory for the Iraqi people because this constitution
   was drafted by Iraqis and ratified by the peoples' representatives.
   This represents a victory because it is a big strike against the
   terrorists.  This victory has reinforced the political process and
   moved Iraq forward on a new historic stage."

   "The Draft Constitution At The National Assembly"

   Independent Ad-Dustoor (8/29) carried an editorial by Bassim:  "The
   national assembly approved the completed draft of the permanent
   constitution yesterday with reservations of the fifteen Sunni members.
   After the approval of the draft, they started to debate and negotiate
   and will continue until the upcoming referendum on October 15, 2005,
   when Iraqis will take responsibility and make a final decision.  Voting
   `Yes' or `No,' all Iraqi sects will engage in the decisive moment to
   move their country to a bright new future.  All those who criticize the
   viewpoints and reservations between political leaders and constitution
   drafting members are wrong, this is how Iraqis should discuss and
   decide their future-through democracy and freedom.  Now we can express
   our opinions and thoughts and we can reject and discuss things freely.
   All political leaders should work on behalf of the Iraqi national
   compact, not to gain private benefits.  We are working hard to make
   this political process succeed and to defeat those who tried their best
   to terminate Iraqi dreams.  The final outcome will be decided by good
   Iraqis who sacrifice themselves for the freedom of their country.  Now
   that the draft constitution is complete (from the legislative angle) we
   will move to the public referendum stage to get real and final and
   approval for Iraq's new permanent constitution."

   "The Announcement Of A Distinguished Day In Iraq"

   Sa'ad Badr Khan opined in Al-Ta'akhi (affiliated with the Kurdistani
   Democratic Party led Masood Barazani) (8/29):  "Yesterday, the Iraqi
   draft constitution was finally announced.  Thus, Iraq approaches
   another step forward in the constitutional process--after this the
   draft is to be approved by the Iraqi people...  The constitution is the
   most dangerous document in a society.  It's a document that organizes
   relationships between rulers and the people and it outlines the main
   authorities within the community.  Unfortunately, Iraq has gone decades
   without having a constitution because the dictator Saddam considered it
   merely a piece of paper that could be ripped up at anytime.  That is
   how Saddam governed the country without a constitution.  The Kurdish
   people have struggled for the sake of establishing democracy in Iraq
   and to guarantee their legitimate rights.  Therefore, the Kurds want an
   Iraqi constitution that can guarantee and safeguard Kurdish rights as a
   legitimate segment of people in Iraq....  Without a doubt, the drafting
   of the constitution was a very difficult task and it would not have
   been accomplished without the bone fide efforts of patriotic
   politicians.  The Kurdish leadership has played a big role in making
   this draft successful through opening the door to dialogue among
   different Iraqi groups.  We are excited about the accomplishment of the
   draft constitution but at the same time, we must remember that the
   Kurds have approved this constitution despite the fact that it does not
   completely satisfy Kurdish ambitions....  The Kurds have the right to
   self-determination.  Although there are some issues (such as the status
   of Kirkuk) that remain to be solved we will never give up our demands.
   We hope that all Iraqis will approve the draft constitution so that
   they can live new lives based on democracy and justice.  The 28th of
   August will always be a historic day in Iraq's history."

   "Iraq Before And After The Constitution"

   Independent, anti-coalition Az-Zaman (8/29) carried an editorial by
   Jassem Murad:  "Will the constitution stabilize the security,
   political, economic and humanitarian situation in Iraq?  In fact, all
   political parties bet on the elections and said that these elections
   would bring peace and stability back to this country.  Those elections
   were successfully held in spite of terrorists' plans that attempted to
   thwart them.  However, those elections could not stabilize the
   situation in Iraq.  The situation has actually worsened and the post
   election period led to a plurality of political parties scattered on
   the Iraqi map....  If this is the post election period, then how can we
   imagine what will happen after the constitution's ratification?  Can
   this constitution solve our crises?  We could say yes if there were a
   national Iraqi leadership that could move Iraq forward and away from
   sectarianism but the reality shows that the constitution cannot solve
   our crises because we have to understand these crises open-mindedly and
   transparently.  We have to reinforce the notion of national dialogue to
   isolate terrorists from those who want to participate in the political
   process.  In addition, we must work hard to improve public services and
   start reconstruction projects to end unemployment in Iraq. And we have
   to make citizens feel they are protected by the government.  By
   accomplishing these conditions, the post constitutional period may
   witness a historic move in our lives.  Otherwise, crises will not be
   solved and they will continue until they make people explode against
   the government."

   "About The Endorsement Of The Draft Constitution"

   Ismael Zayyer commented in independent As-Sabah Al-Jadeed (8/29):
   "Iraqis deserve to celebrate the completion of their permanent draft
   constitution, a good initiative for Iraqis to open closed doors.
   Iraqis reached a final accord after hard and peaceful efforts and
   dialogue among all political groups to reach a final agreement freely
   and with no air of injustice.  We may have different points of view and
   opinions but we are all a unified nation, a land and country with one
   significant Iraqi soul throughout.  We agree with all those who have
   their own ideas and views concerning the constitution, they have a
   right to express their choices the way they want through the media.
   Today we celebrate our success, but we should be aware that this is the
   first step in the democratic process, and we must work hard and prepare
   for the next step--the upcoming referendum on the draft constitution.
   If Iraqis accept or reject the draft constitution freely in the
   upcoming referendum process we must respect that.  What is more
   important is that we have a truly free and fair referendum with polling
   boxes far removed from Iraq's presidential guards, private guards, and
   the security and intelligence apparatus because we now have national
   dialogue and freedom."

   "Iraq's Constitution--Theater Of The Absurd"

   Salah Omar Al-Ali noted in Iraq 4 All News Website
   (http://iraq4all.org) (8/29):  "For six months now, the Iraqi National
   Assembly's theater has been showing a comedy entitled, 'Drafting the
   Iraqi Constitution.'  And we reveal no secret when we say that all acts
   were completely prepared in the White House kitchen.  As for the
   actors, they only have the role of translating these scenes and
   expressing them through tragic gestures to limits that make you sad and
   want to cry and through comic gestures that do the same.  Whereas some
   players support and others reject (they agree and disagree) they all
   follow one director occupying Iraq's thrown these days--the Occupiers
   (Ambassador Khalilzad and Negroponte before him).  Many nations took a
   long time to draft their constitutions, including the United States
   that needed eight years to complete and approve its constitution, while
   Germany took seven years after toppling the Nazi regime.  So how can
   Iraq's constitution be drafted in seven months while it's still under
   the occupation of the U.S. military, and should we distract people with
   this issue to divert their attention from the main cause of resisting
   occupation?  The current constitution completely neglects the country's
   sovereignty, advocates for sectarian confrontations under the guise of
   federalism, and threatens unity under the moniker of preserving
   rights.  Imposing a constitution drafted according to the TAL and
   devised by the best known Zionist extremist personalities represents
   the utmost degree of disrespect for Iraqis and Iraq's future
   generations.  We join our voices with those demanding the rejection of
   this draft which, if approved, will expose Iraq to great catastrophes.
   We call for demonstrations, a collection of signatures to be sent to
   the U.N., and convening meetings in all Iraqi cities to clarify the
   dangers resident in this draft proposed by an illegitimate National
   Assembly."

   "Islamists Remove Their Masks--Beware Of The Constitution"

   Editorial by Nejah Yousif commented in the Modern Discussion
   Website(http://www.rezgar.com)) (8/29):  "I wasn't surprised by the
   vicious campaign launched by supporters of the United Iraqi Alliance
   against the Communist Party and the Kurdish coalition, after finding
   itself in an undesirable position due to its failure in providing
   security, deteriorating services, and administrative corruption, in
   addition to many assassinations and attacks executed by its militias
   currently controlling police and military forces which can be clearly
   seen though sectarian slogans mimicked by these forces on Iraqi
   satellite channels.  Drafting a constitution is a national
   responsibility that should not overlook any of the population's
   components nor hinder half of the society through Islamic laws.  The
   current 'revised' draft constitution reflects the ambitions and desires
   of religious clerics to take over and reach the state of clerical
   ruling currently found in Iran.  This draft is worse than the first
   constitution in Iraq's history.  The stinking stench of sectarianism is
   obvious and its consequences will be inflicted on the suffering
   masses.  What makes things worse is that the election boycotters, or
   those who are truly former regime elements, have rejected the draft for
   proposing Islam as a main source of legislation and not the main source
   of legislation.  In addition to opposing federalism and the eradication
   of the Ba'ath Party they want to return to square one and rehabilitate
   their fascist party members so they may re-enter the political process
   and take over power again.  On the other hand, the U.S. seems to be
   confused about its policy in Iraq, allowing Islamists to impose their
   Islamic constitution over a multi religious and intellectually diverse
   Iraqi society.  The U.S. promoted this constitution describing it as a
   democratic example that would encourage the region's people, but what
   seems to me and others is that it neither encourages Iraqis nor the
   region's people, and if allowed to continue it will yield an
   ineffectual and decrepit constitution.  And to complete the picture,
   the attack against secular and democratic powers should start now.
   Where today's fascists have learned from those of yesterday, and have
   followed the concept of divide and conquer by assuring Kurds of
   federalism (until they were able to gain endless rights for the Shiite
   clergy and their take over of the police and army forces) and
   circulating rumors about communists and their struggles to distort
   their image and prevent any secular and democratic visions.  Iraqis
   have shown patience and endured crises and bloody wars to be able to
   live in a society of justice and equality, without sectarian divisions
   where women remain threatened by the authority and dominance of men.
   The only thing I can do in the face of the enemies of democracy is to
   vote 'No' over the constitution."

   "The Constitution Between Compromise And Veto"

   Adil Al-Rubai'ee editorialized in Dar al-Iraqiya (The Iraqi House)
   Website (http://www.normal.iraq-ina.com/showarticles.php?id=1270)
   (8/29):  "All civilized countries throughout the world have had their
   democratic and constitutional experiments which developed over decades
   or even hundreds of years before evolving into their current forms
   guaranteeing stability and prosperity for their citizens and promoting
   the peaceful transfer of authority through democratic principles based
   on competition among political parties and power through ballot boxes.
   Although a lot of these experiments are similar in their outlines,
   concerning the general principles of political life, we can't ignore
   that each experiment is unique due to political and constitutional
   changes.  And whoever reads the political and constitutional history of
   these countries will find that constitutions were developed and
   integrated over time in ways that match peoples' hopes and open new
   horizons.  Our draft constitution and all of the hot debates around it
   is a base for the new Iraq and not a future frozen in a destiny that
   can't be changed or modified--especially if we know that people have
   the final word.  The important thing is that sticking issues should be
   settled according to national interests and not to use compromises to
   impose minority vetoes on the majority because that won't serve the
   political process or the national interest."

   "Ba'athism And The Legitimacy Of The Constitution"

   Abdul Baqi Faraj opined in Wattan 4 All (A Country for All) News
   Website (http://wattan4all.com/viewarticle.php?id=3295&pg=articles)
   (8/29):  "This constitution lacks legitimacy--this is what a man who
   landed on a podium coming from another time announced!  He was a man
   without a mustache and long beard who put a white turban on his head,
   who wore a flowing white garment with a black short cloak on his
   shoulders.  I thought for awhile that he was one of Sahaba (Prophet's
   friends) or one who was carrying his sword though he didn't have one.
   You could give this individual, from another world, several names!  He
   resembles Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Zarqawi, Qatar's Foreign
   Minister, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Bashar
   Al'Assad, Qdaf al-Dam and numerable others of death and darkness.  But
   he is comrade Sheikh Abdul Nasir Al-Janabi who came forward this
   morning to announce Iraq's constitution for which Iraqi people will
   cast their votes on October 15th.  'This constitution lacks legitimacy'
   because it wasn't written on a basis of compromise!  With whom and how
   could compromise be achieved?  Abdul Nasir's comrades announced....
   The constitution should be written in a compromise with them!  What
   they intend to do is to re-legitimize respect for the Nazi Ba'ath
   Party.  Apart from being, you either agree or disagree with the draft
   Iraqi constitution because its articles were written by people with
   clerical minds.  This is the political reality and this is the power
   balance.  You should listen to the peoples' opinion even if you
   disagree with those who wrote the constitution and with majority
   opinion which is not always right!  You should then listen on October
   15th for two letters or more when people say 'Yes' or 'No.' "

   "The Constitution Is The Fruit Of The Political Process"


   Independent As-Sabah al-Jadeed editorialized (8/28):  "After the
   downfall of the dictatorial regime, freedom rose like the sun in Iraq
   and the country began to move forward towards security, advancement,
   and prosperity.  Today, the Iraqi people have to play a big role to
   make this process successful.  All Iraqis, whether they agree or
   disagree with the current political process, need to work towards
   Iraq's national interest.  The Iraqi people challenged and crushed
   terror when they headed for the ballot boxes during the elections on
   the 30th of January....  Now, it is time to complete this process by
   drafting a constitution for this country and its people.  It is time
   for Iraqis to now harvest the fruits they have been waiting for.  They
   will not be affected by terror as long as the constitution will open
   the door to hope and progress.  The development of the political
   process means that we are defeating terror in Iraq.  So, we call on all
   Iraqis to bring their containers to collect the fruits of the political
   process."


   "The Constitution--Between Harmony And Veto"


   Adel Al-Rubai'ee opined in Islamic Dawa Party-affiliated Al-Bayyan
   (8/28):  "All civilized countries have their own democratic and
   constitutional experiments that were developed over years before
   reaching their final forms and many countries' experiments are
   similar.  However, establishing democratic communities does not come
   from nothing but is developed through years of political work and
   effort.  Indeed, the constitutions of other countries have taken years
   to develop....  Concerning our draft constitution, I believe that
   current disagreements and disputes amongst Iraqi politicians in the
   National Assembly represent a healthy debate to build a new Iraq.  The
   Iraqi people will have their final say about the constitution during
   the referendum.  But, the most important matter now is to solve all
   pending issues in accordance with national interests.  These issues
   must not be resolved according to a minority veto at the expenses of
   the majority because this does not benefit the political process or
   national interests."


   "Our Iraqi Efforts And Our Kurdish Hopes"


   Sa'ad Badr Khan wrote on the front page of KDP-affiliated (Barzani)
   Al-Ta'akhi (8/28):  "The Iraqi constitution is being drafted amid
   disputes, disagreements, and harmony amongst Iraqi politicians.  This
   represents the proper way to reach the goal that is to make the
   constitutional process successful.  This constitution can make Iraq's
   two main nationalities, Arabs and Kurds, in addition to other sects,
   feel they are real Iraqi citizens.  The Kurdish list insists on
   defending Iraq as one country and at the same time it defends Kurdish
   rights through this constitution.  When the Kurds insist on not making
   Iraq an Islamic republic this means that they want to build a modern
   state for all Iraqis.  When the Kurds demand women's rights they call
   for guaranteeing all Iraqi women's rights without discrimination....
   The Kurds believe in democracy and in a new Iraq and they also think
   that it is necessary to install federalism throughout Iraq.  We know
   that federalism is an optional choice that has its own justifications.
   These are the Kurdish orientations that represent purely Iraqi
   viewpoints.  The Kurdish attitude was characterized with transparency
   and insistence on making all Iraqis participate in the current
   constitutional process.  The Kurds have played a vital role in
   encouraging dialogue about the constitution....  The upcoming stage
   following the referendum will be more dangerous and sensitive.  The
   next period requires more wisdom, attention, accuracy, and objectivity
   to make the referendum successful and to pass the constitution's
   articles.  This is the main goal of any honest Iraqi."


   "We Are Waiting For The Good News"


   Bassim Al-Sheikh stated in Independent Ad-Dustoor (8/28):  "We are
   expecting the National Assembly to approve the draft constitution today
   by two-thirds of its members.  A promotional campaign will begin to
   educate Iraqis about the basics and principals of the constitution, in
   spite of those who are working against Iraq's unity and trying to
   create crisis and sectarianism among Iraqi sects; those who are singing
   for civil war and division will never relent in their mischievous plots
   against Iraq....  The draft constitution was submitted to the National
   Assembly by the deadline of the first extension and now members are
   having discussions and making amendments to the last draft to vote for
   final approval.  Hence, everyone should be aware today that there is no
   way to go back--the political process should move forward and we should
   all work together to help it succeed.  We should all work for the
   benefits of our Iraq and work against our enemies' will and make this
   day a day of good news."


   "Harmonious Agreement Is A Healthy Sign In The March Toward Democracy"


   Abdul Hadi Mahdi observed in Pro-Coalition, PUK-affiliated, Al-Ittihad
   (8/28):  "The structure of Iraqi society is considered complicated
   compared to other societies.  Iraqi society consists of pluralistic
   nationalities and a diversity of religions and sects that have
   uniqueness that must be respected....  Despite all that, Iraq's society
   seems to be more united than other societies which lack such
   diversity.  Therefore, this must be considered during the drafting of
   the constitution....  Harmonious agreement is considered a healthy sign
   in the democratic march, because Iraq's foundation cannot withstand a
   certain group imposing its will on others.  The time of marginalizing
   others has gone; all Iraqis must assert their political and national
   rights and this cannot happen without a permanent constitution drafted
   through harmony.  Today, Iraqis hope to reach harmony through their
   political leaders' announcement of a final draft for the permanent
   constitution."


   "The Constitution And Political Memory"


   Falah Al-Mish'al opined in independent Al-Sabah (8/28):  "An observer
   of the constitutional committee's work can find some relevance in the
   political memories of committee and TNA members.  Those members recall
   their disasters and sacrifices while they are drafting the constitution
   phrase by phrase.  The majority of TNA members are Shiites and Kurds
   and they share joint obsessions, due to their suffering under the
   former regime.  Therefore, you can find their demands in line with
   their political memories....  The Sunnis are against the others because
   they represent the ruling class in Iraq from the establishment of the
   Iraqi state in 1921 until Saddam's toppling in 2003.  Therefore, they
   act with a ruler's logic and not that of one who has been ruled.  And
   their political memory functions in the past more than it does in the
   future....  The question is: will the draft constitution define
   Ba'athist ideology as a terrorist one that propagated real criminal
   activity, started wars, and triumphed in the comprehensive destruction
   throughout Iraq because of Saddam's policies?  This trail of
   destruction will require more than decades in order to be forgotten.
   It is etched in the memories and the spirit of Iraq more than merely
   being mentioned in a document made of paper."


   "Committed Period"

   Dawa Party-affiliated Al-Bayyan (8/25) published an editorial by Zainab
   Al-Khafaji:  "The National Dialogue Council's position concerning the
   draft constitution may prevent it from wide participation in the
   constitutional process.  Initially the draft of the constitution was
   drawn up following an accord that was reached by the majority of Iraqi
   political parties that ostensibly represent the people.  Therefore,
   these discussions cannot be described as based on ethnic power sharing
   because discussions on the constitution led to an agreement amongst
   politicians.... The recent dispute on pending issues does not represent
   a refusal of the draft constitution but it is a good chance for
   political parties and blocs to end their disagreements.  I think that
   these disagreements are insignificant if we compare them to the issue
   of the Ba'ath Party's destiny in Iraq and the distribution of
   powers.... The National Dialogue Council must understand that it has to
   reconsider its attitude especially after the Kurdish coalition and the
   United Iraqi Alliance agreed to postpone ratification of the
   constitution in order to grant them more time to settle pending
   issues.  Prime Minister Ibrahim Al-Ja'afari said that this resolution
   is necessary and that every thing must be resolved within three days
   because the current period is a decisive and sensitive one.  Otherwise,
   the National Dialogue Council will squander a big opportunity to
   actively participate in the upcoming constitutional process."


   "The Overwhelming Majority"


   Independent, anti-coalition Al-Fourat (8/25) carried an editorial by
   Majed Fadhel Al-Zaboon:  "The technical process for the upcoming
   referendum still remains unclear.  The majority of Iraqis say they are
   unaware of the voting procedures, which is the responsibility of the
   Iraqi electoral commission!....  Some of the voters think that the
   electoral process involves a simple 'yes' or `no' on the draft
   constitution; such a procedure would deprive Iraqis the right to
   explain their opinions about good and bad principles and the basics of
   the draft constitution.  The Iraqi electoral commission should not
   render the referendum process a generic one because Iraqis must express
   private opinions about their new constitution....  If this process is
   difficult to achieve, the referendum process should include
   disagreement points, this is the way our new constitution will gain
   legitimacy.  An accepted compromise to satisfy all Iraqi sects should
   be designed to enable us to rebuild and to succeed in our political and
   democratic process without any marginalization or neglect for any Iraqi
   sects.  This will be the way we can reach our national compact and
   independence and force the occupation forces to leave our country....
   The upcoming constitutional referendum should include all Iraqi sects
   (specifically the opposition) because some of the constitution articles
   should be removed and others affirmed.  The majority of Iraqis should
   decide to accept the draft constitution, not the minority.  And
   everyone must participate in the upcoming referendum process to decide
   for Iraq."


   "A Kurdish Vision For The Iraqi Constitution"


   KDP affiliated (Barzani) Al-Taakhi (8/25) published a front-page
   editorial by Editor-in-Chief, Badr Khan Al-Sindi on Kurdish views of
   the constitution:  "The Kurdish Parliament has approved and supported
   the draft constitution.  President Barazani said that this draft is a
   great achievement (especially during this period) despite the inclusion
   of some items that do not coincide with Kurdish ambitions.  Kurdish
   support comes as a reply to those who want to blame the Kurds for
   attempting to obstruct the genesis of the Iraqi constitution....  For
   the second time, the Kurds have proved that they are committed to the
   main principles, which were agreed upon with various political parties
   at points earlier.  The Kurds want to make this constitution successful
   and they've placed emphasis on the principles of reconciliation and the
   wide participation of all Iraqi sects.  However, we must not cede our
   legitimate national interests, ambitions, and right to decide our
   destiny.  We think that the current draft constitution will strengthen
   the federalist experiment in Iraq in a way that reinforces unity
   without the marginalization of any other sect....  This is a new Iraq,
   which must be based on equal distribution of resources apart from the
   control of the central government that devastated the country.  We do
   not think that the current constitution satisfies Kurdish desires.
   However, we see that there are some chauvinistic and dictatorial
   mentalities trying to impart the constitution with tyrannical ideals.
   Everyone must understand that Iraq is moving forward and the federal
   solution is the best way to solve all problems.  As we approach the
   referendum, we hope that Iraq will enjoy peace, economic prosperity,
   and deep democratic awareness.  We hope this awareness will not
   surprise Iraqis one day when they hear that the Kurds want to decide
   their own destiny."


   "Devils Of The Constitution"


   Anti-coalition Az-Zaman (8/25) carried an editorial by Jihad Zayyer:
   "Today Iraqi politicians, most of whom lack real political
   professionalism and sufficient experience, will discuss the draft
   constitution in the national assembly.  At the same time, Iraqis will,
   and perhaps negatively, deal with the items of this constitution
   because they want to know the results of politicians' disagreements
   over pending issues....  Iraqis have the right to know the details and
   implications of the constitution's articles, which will govern their
   lives.  We know that the majority of Iraqis, who for instance harbor
   anti-federalist attitudes, lack information on governmental structure
   especially in countries that have ethnic diversity.  Hence, they have
   the right to be suspicious of current Iraqi politicians because they do
   not know what the Iraqi people need.  Current political parties are
   still distant from the people and these parties are ignorant about
   people's intentions and orientations.  Current Iraqi politicians speak
   about federalism, the role of religion in government, and the equitable
   distribution of natural resources.  On the other hand, the government's
   offices are filled with corruption....  These politicians want to
   occupy Iraqi minds with complicated political concepts.  But, how can a
   nation that was marginalized from real political participation
   understand concepts that may contain devils and disasters?  Modern
   concepts and the sound policies of politicians alone cannot help Iraqis
   reveal the true intentions of these politicians."


   "The Favorable Disagreement"


   Bassem Al-Sheikh editorialized in independent Ad-Dustoor (8/25):  "The
   Sunni rejection of the draft constitution submitted to the national
   assembly is a healthy reaction; they initiated publicity campaigns to
   encourage `no votes' in the upcoming referendum.  Disagreements and
   different points of view are normal in life and dealing with such
   issues should be done in a civilized way; democracy means different
   points of view and more importantly how much influence one can
   wield....  Therefore, the responsibility of those who reject the
   constitution is to create an influential opposition and enough
   supporters to back that opinion and then to have the influence to
   change and rule the political process.  The technical processes are
   good because it keeps the process within the safety margins; public
   oversights, international political scrutiny, and the media have all
   witnessed the birth of the new constitution....  Now parliamentary
   members have legitimate authority to discuss every single article in
   the constitution.  They will not permit a premature constitution to
   pass and even if they did, the majority of Iraqis will say no in the
   upcoming referendum.  This is the Iraqi will and public influence in
   the democratic process.  The Sunni powers which are protesting through
   conservatives on the draft constitution committee decided that the
   upcoming referendum will be their way to say no to a constitution that
   does not include all their rights and demands."

   "Money, Power, and the Constitution"


   Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed opined in Asharq al-Awsat (8/25):  "There are
   several points of the disagreements inside the TNA that postponed the
   agreement on the constitution....  Sunnis made a mistake last year by
   boycotting the election and are paying for it now.  Realizing the scope
   of this mistake, suddenly their leaders are now calling for
   participation in the political process.  Today, the Shiites and the
   Kurds would be making a grave mistake if they did not grant the Sunnis
   guarantees in the constitution.  Without the Sunnis, the large,
   powerful state of Iraq will turn into a number of weak small
   states....  It is surprising that the constitutional disagreement has
   become Shiite-Sunnis or Arab-Kurds.  The deepest disagreements are
   within each team, not among teams.  The real disagreement is between
   the Islamists and the secularists, within both Sunni and Shiite
   communities.  It will deepen in the future, because the constitution is
   not dealing with the fundamental issues."


   "Who Wants To Divide Iraq?"


   SCIRI affiliated Al-Adala (8/25) carried an editorial by Zuhair
   Al-Baghdadi on federalism:  "No one has the right to accuse any Iraqi
   of not being patriotic, because each one of us has his own position
   about the correct path toward a new nation.  We are Iraqis before
   anything else.  The argument now is about federalism and its
   implementation in the new Iraq.  On one side, they believe that
   federalism means the division of Iraq into small separated states, weak
   and easily swallowed by neighboring countries.  As such, it is bad and
   all Iraqis must reject it.  On the other hand, there are those who
   believe that it will not result in weakness and division, Iraq will
   become like other federal countries that have one border, one
   constitution, one flag and one identity....  Tthe people will determine
   whether accept it or not, they will express their opinion through the
   referendum on the constitution.  People, not political factions will
   determine our destiny.  Let us stop talking under a particular sect or
   nationality, we are all Iraqis....  Some say that the Kurds should have
   the right to implement the federalism, but that the Arabs in the
   southern or the central areas should not, claming that Iran or the Gulf
   States will interfere.  This is unacceptable.  One can not claim the
   right of federalism for one part of Iraq and not accept it for another.
    Federalism is the fair distribution of resources, it will speed up the
   reconstruction, and create job opportunities.  Furthermore, it will
   establish security and stability, by granting greater authority for the
   districts and provinces."


   "The Iraqi Constitution . . . The Downfall Of The U.S. Reform Project"


   Fehed Al-Naser opined in the Modern Discussion
   Web-Site,(http://www.rezgar.com/search/Dsearch.asp?ls=0&code=arabic>)
   (8/25):  "The American President George Bush expressed great joy on the
   occasion of completing the Iraqi draft constitution.  His happiness
   also reflects an admission that the American Middle East project for
   political reform, the termination of tyrannical regimes, of granting
   freedoms, setting up democracies, and acknowledging human rights has
   faced a severe setback.  We will all realize that the broad hopes of
   the United States government's promotion of the era of freedom and
   human rights in Iraq is facing a crisis as soon as we take the first
   look at the Iraqi draft constitution....  The announced draft
   constitution was nothing more than a bomb project.  It is a warning of
   complicated political affairs full of ethnic and sectarian wars with
   uncalculated consequences.  It was written to serve the interests of
   particular sides and they are explicitly expressing their ethnic and
   sectarian ambitions.  By placing the name of Saddam and his fascist
   party in the draft's introduction, these sides are sending out a
   message to Iraqis that they should accept this document in return for
   their salvation from the former dictatorship's suppression....  The
   Iraqi constitution, if approved, will be a very harsh lesson for the
   administration of the United States.  It will witness its visions of
   modern personal and civil freedoms being replaced by the rights of
   sects, ethnicities, and tribes.  It is a document that recognizes human
   beings by their ethnic and sectarian backgrounds and not by
   accomplishments, ideas, and participation in building society....  We
   can forget about our hopes for our state being ruled by law.   We need
   to reconcile ourselves to the fact that our state will be ruled by
   ethnic and sectarian authorities and aging tribal traditions that
   deform our societal relations, and create huge obstacles for freedom of
   political and intellectual activities....  Anyone who wants a free and
   prosperous future for Iraq should say no to this constitution."


   "A Hasty Constitution....  A Disgrace For A Great Nation"


   Sameer Ubaid commented in Iraq 4 All News Web-Site,
   (<http://iraq4all.org/>) (8/25):  "The issue will not withstand further
   debate, compliments, or hiding, you either vote in favor of President
   Bush, Tel-Aviv, and Tehran's constitution, or you reject in favor of a
   united Iraq.  The current constitution is similar to a United States
   fast food meal and it isn't worthy of respect.  It is suitable for the
   era of occupation, where the administrative law was considered a Qu'ran
   coming down from the Israeli Noah Fieldman, with prophets named Bush
   junior, Bremmer, Negroponte, Khalilzad, and Satterfield....  The new,
   hastily drafted constitution; written according to President Bush's
   orders, and under the supervision of Khalilzad and Satterfield, failed
   to meet Iraqis' ambitions even by five percent.  It only met some of
   the Kurds' ambitions for separation, but at the expense of Arabic Iraqi
   people....  We can summarize the constitution by saying it pleased the
   Kurds, displeased Shiites, and wasted Sunnis....  Provided the
   document, drafted in a purely Zionist manner was approved, the south
   will belong to the Iranians and those supporting them, the north will
   go to the Kurdish elite, while the west will become another Somalia
   with no resources and a very fragile economy.  From an American point
   of view, Iraq is a candidate to become the new Chechnya by attracting
   extremists....  What took place during the constitutional discussions
   was nothing more than an American stage play.  Because the constitution
   was drafted before the war on Iraq; today's discussions are only part
   of the play performed to the world....  For the first time in history,
   a foreign Ambassador (Khalilzad) and his assistant (Satterfield),
   played the role of monitor and inspector for an independent nation's
   constitution....  Has there ever been a situation where a nation's
   constitution was drafted within days and submitted to Parliament eight
   minutes before deadline?  Won't this movie of fantasy and disrespect
   ever come to an end in Iraq?  And who will tell Khalilzad and
   Satterfield that enough is enough?....  There should be an uprising of
   the people to drive the occupation forces out of our country.  They
   should also fire the failed politicians, and call for Iraq to be left
   to honorable Iraqis from all backgrounds who know how to put together
   the best political, government, and constitutional combination....  At
   the end...those who wish to vote in favor of such a constitution,
   please send a greeting to the Zionists, and present Iraq to Iran on a
   golden plate."


   "Iraqi Draft Constitution....  And The Incomplete Birth"


   Hamza Al-Shamkh commented in Al-Badeal Al-Democrati (The Democratic
   Alternative) Web-Site, (<http://www.albadeal.com/>) (8/25):  "Many
   politicians are making statements to local and foreign media outlets
   about the absence of deep differences that could prevent the completion
   of the Iraqi constitution draft on time....  But unfortunately, these
   statements don't reflect what is actually going on.  There are many
   differences and disagreements among the different components of the
   Iraqi people.  This is quite natural taking into consideration the
   variety of religions, doctrines, ethnicities, and political parties
   that are involved....  Unfortunately, it wasn't finished.  This was due
   to the unresolved differences between the participants.  So, they
   agreed upon another three-day extension....  Postponements and
   extensions are useless if the parties involved refuse to
   compromise....  Everyone should have the unity of Iraq and its people
   as their primary goal.  This should not be done by media statements,
   but by having the courage and the resolve to come to an agreement.
   This agreement needs to be something that keeps the entire sectarian,
   political, and intellectual trends on the front burner.  Without this
   agreement the draft constitution will not see the light of day, nor
   will it be submitted to a referendum by mid-October....  So we have the
   right to ask all concerned parties, will these three days witness a
   miracle and will you present a final draft to the National Assembly.
   Or will we witness another round of struggles that take us back to
   square one."


   "The Suggested Constitution and the Challenges"


   Yousif Fadhil,opined in
   http://www.nahrain.com/d/news/05/08/25/nhr0825a.html (8/25):  "I smiled
   as I watched the scenes of joy coming from all over Iraq when the draft
   constitution was finished.  Then I read draft constitution and heard
   the plans of the Sunni faction and Sadr movement and saw the
   demonstrations in Kirkuk and other regions.  I went to the Iraqi
   websites and read the statements from American president George Bush
   and other American politicians talking about the possibility of
   dividing Iraq into three small states!....  I then asked myself what
   stance should I take on this constitution?   I have seen Kurds place
   demands on the constitution.  I have heard the Shiites concerns
   addressed and province's demands for the fair distribution of the oil
   wealth and a non-centralized rule met....  But our concerns will remain
   as long as the intensions of the political parties are not good.  Is
   there a way to overcome bad intentions?  This is the biggest challenge
   Iraq will face.  Iraq's progress and prosperity will depend on good
   intension and good intensions are the sole guarantee for our economic
   and political unity....  I'm an Arab and I suppose I have rights so why
   do I consider them a gift?  These rights that the Kurds, the Turkmen,
   the Persians, and the Keldo-Assyrians enjoy are a natural and civilized
   part of what it means to be an Iraqi.  Yes they are all included in the
   constitution however practical implementation takes time.  The people
   need to be educated about these rights in order to have them be shaped
   in the community.  If we can achieve this then we have succeed in
   writing our constitution....  Writing a constitution isn't hard, it is
   the implementation of its principles that is difficult to do.  Iraq had
   a permanent constitution but our leaders paid no attention to it.  The
   peak of these violations took place under Saddam Hussein's rule.  As I
   said before if federalism or non-central rule doesn't include good
   intentions with the correct implementation all of this effort will not
   achieve anything....  It's worth mentioning that there is still a
   chance to change the constitution if we find any problems in it."


   "The Second Step"


   Salim Rasool wrote in Islamic Dawa Party-affiliated (Ja'afari)
   Al-Bayyan (8/24):  "At last, the newborn constitution has been
   submitted to the national assembly to give assembly members a chance to
   have a look at it.  The next step is to find out what the Iraqi people
   think of the new constitution....  This constitution was not easy to
   draft.  Indeed, it made the Iraqi politicians work very hard and
   discuss difficult issues in order to draft a constitution that
   guarantees the rights of all Iraqis....  The Iraqi politicians were
   able to submit the constitution draft before the second deadline.
   Nobody thought that the constitution would be submitted on time due to
   the continuous disagreements among the politicians.  However, the Iraqi
   government proved that they are responsible and that they can reach an
   agreement despite the fact that their members come from different
   religions, ethnicities and nationalities....  The Iraqi leaders are
   moving forward wisely to continue the political process.  I am
   optimistic about the next step, which is the National Assembly's
   endorsement of the constitution draft.  After that, the Iraqi people
   will have their final word during the referendum."


   "Federalism Is The Decision Of Our Free Will"


   Badr Khan Al-Sindi commented KDP-affiliated (Barzani) Al-Ta'akhi
   (8/24):  "Those who oppose federalism in Iraq are either ignorant about
   the true meaning of federalism or they have a nationalistic, or
   religious desire control others.  So, it is not very surprising that
   there have been objections to the idea of establishing federalist
   territories....  In fact federalism is somewhat of a strange concept
   for the majority of Iraqis.  This is due to the media coverage of the
   concept.  The Iraqi media has been responsible for educating people
   about federalism.  It does not seem that they have done a good job.
   Today, the majority of Iraqis, even those who support federalism, do
   not know that half of the world's countries live under federal
   regimes.  The Iraqi people do not know that we are not the first
   country who called for the establishment of federalism....  In
   addition, many of those who oppose federalism do not want to admit that
   federalism means unity and it does not mean separation.  Iraq has
   suffered for more than 80 years since the establishment of the first
   Iraqi state.  It was formed according to a British plan.  However, that
   plan proved to be unsuccessful.  Iraq has experienced disasters,
   starvation, wars and tyranny in the south.  We all know that the Kurds
   and the Arabs are brothers in this country.  But, we must not forget
   that Iraq is made up of two main nations and the Kurds have the right
   to decide their own future....  Without a doubt, those who oppose
   federalism are the same people who condemn dictatorship.  Actually,
   some of them suffered from that dictatorship.  We must accept that here
   in Iraq centralized governments are ripe for dictatorships.  Federalism
   is the only way that can prevent the creation of another dictatorship
   in Iraq.  Removal of a dictator does not mean that the Kurdish people
   are ready to receive a new dictator in the name of nationalism or
   religion....  It is very important to include federalism in the
   constitution because the Kurds and the Arabs who support this option
   want to establish it in the new Iraq.  Federalism is the best way to
   defend the new Iraq and we think that federalism reflects our free
   will."


   "Pending Issues"


   Ali Khalif asserted in SCIRI-affiliated Al-Adala (8/24):  "The issue of
   federalism in the territories cannot be described as separation because
   all Iraqi political groups call for Iraq's unity.  In addition, the
   United Iraqi Alliance has demanded to give every province the right to
   establish one or more territories.  Furthermore, any territory can be
   merged with other territories.  Does this sound like separation?  This
   system will unite Iraq according to the will of the territories.  If
   those who oppose federalism want to unite Iraq, why don't they
   establish their own federal territories and demand to be merged with
   the south or the north in an attempt to unite the country?...  Why do
   they want to omit from the Constitution the article that speaks about
   the Ba'ath party?  We want to mention the Ba'ath party in order to
   remind people with its crimes....  Concerning the distribution of
   natural resources; if we want to be selfish we would make the United
   Iraqi Alliance the big loser.  But, we wanted to fairly distribute the
   revenue among all Iraqis.  However, the Iraqi people are waiting for
   the referendum in order to give their final opinion on the merits of
   the constitution."


   "The Solution Is To Dissolve The National Assembly"


   Fateh Abdul Salam contended in independent, anti-Coalition Az-Zaman
   (8/24):  "It would be no big sacrifice to dissolve the National
   Assembly and admit the failure of the drafting committee.   This would
   ensure safety for the Iraqi people while they are witnessing the
   failure of all of their hopes....  The best choice is to dissolve the
   TNA, because they won't be able to resolve the issues that plague the
   draft Constitution....  Therefore, The TNA is the best sacrifice,
   because it is already a temporary entity...full of problems.  The TNA
   was established under exceptional circumstances and the Iraqis will not
   feel sorry for dissolving it.  This political body has not benefited
   the Iraqis at all.  However, they have learned a good lesson for the
   upcoming elections.  They have learned to keep their eyes wide open at
   the ballot boxes in the future....  So, feel the comfort of dissolving
   the TNA and stop trying to build this heavy Constitution on such a weak
   base, because it will collapse in the end."


   "The Uncovered Lie"


   Al-Basaer an anti-Coalition weekly affiliated with the Association of
   Muslim Scholars, editorialized (8/24):  "It is a bad situation for any
   nation when its leader becomes a liar and does not fulfill his
   promises.....  We were looking forward to forgetting about this
   phenomenon of a liar leader.  Unfortunately, the phenomenon has gotten
   bigger than it was before because now we have more than one leader.
   Sometimes the leaders get along and sometimes they are looking out for
   their own interests.  No matter what, each of those leaders acts as
   though he is the main leader of our people.  He assures us that he is
   taking care of the nation's interests better than anyone else....
   Those leaders talk about the constitution in the name of Iraq and they
   act like unity is the most important thing in the world to them.
   However, every time those leaders get together they behave in the best
   interests of their own sect or party and not in the best interest of
   Iraq....  Some of them claim that Iraqis are drafting the constitution
   without any external pressure.  Not even American pressure.  However,
   we did see the U.S. Ambassador attending sessions of the TNA.  The
   government continues to put out statements that are full of lies.  They
   promise, but they do nothing."


   "Constitution Draft Is A Compromise"


   Bassem Al-Sheikh opined in Independent Al-Dustoor (8/24):  "Everyone
   admired the flexibility of the political forces during the negotiations
   over the permanent constitution.  The political leaders were able to
   complete the draft despite the short amount of time they had to achieve
   this victory and the stress involved....  Iraq is anxiously awaiting
   the results of the National Assembly's vote process.   They are
   watching to see how they resolve several pending issues between the
   cross-sections of different political forces....  The Sunni
   representatives still claim that they are being ignored and
   marginalized by the powerful parties in the Constitution Draft
   Committee.  I think this is to be expected because the previous
   electoral process allowed those political parties to dominate the
   political process.  However, the committee members were very eager to
   consider the minority opinions and allow those opinions into the
   constitution draft.  They also took the time to consider all
   disagreement points and reach a compromise among all the political
   elements involved.  They did this because this path benefited all
   Iraqis. The submitted constitution draft is a document that was
   achieved through compromise.  The Iraqi politicians did this to secure
   safety for all Iraqis.


   "Our Constitution Is Between Our Hands"


   Falah Al-Mish'al wrote in independent As-Sabah Newspaper (8/23):  "Once
   again Iraqis have succeed in securing their political future, by
   drafting a national constitution that protects the unity and wellbeing
   of Iraq.  This document favors the people over other sectarian or
   ethnic allegiances....  This accomplishment not only effects the
   current political situation in Iraq, it also represents an Iraqi
   dream.  It is the dream of freedom and civil rights ensured by a
   permanent constitution.  Iraqis have kept that dreams alive through
   decades full of struggle....  The document will be available for all
   Iraqis to read within two months.  The Iraqi people will then vote
   their opinions just like they did during the last election....  We hope
   that the same efforts that went into the constitution will be applied
   to issuing new legislation toward what remains of Saddam's government.
   These legislations will suit the new lawful democratic state that is
   born from Constitution.  Congratulations go out to everyone for this
   national accomplishment and for each step toward granting the rights of
   safety and prosperity for our people."


   "Central Iraq"


   Independent, Anti-Coalition Al-Mashriq (8/23) carried a commentary by
   Shamil Abdul Qadder:  "There is a confusion about federalism and its
   relationship to breaking up Iraq into separate parts.  Some Iraqi
   political groups only consider federalism in relation to the Kurds.  It
   seems that 80% of the Iraqi population do not accept any kind of
   federalism.  They consider it a move toward Iraq's destruction....
   Today, the Iraqi political groups think that it is necessary to
   establish a central government with the presence of a Kurdish federal
   territory....  Some politicians believe that presence of a Kurdish and
   Arab federal territories will stabilize security in Iraq.  Others think
   that making each province a federal territory with the presence of a
   central government will disrupt Iraq's unity.  I believe that if
   politicians continue to insist upon the establishment of federal
   territories we will start to see areas similar to Kurdistan such as
   Basrahstan, Umarahstan and Nasseriyastan....  We all know that the
   British imperialists tried to cut Iraq off from the rest of the world.
   The Kurds are in a mountainous area.  They are like a small Iraq
   without a shore.  Hence, it is impossible to establish a Kurdish state
   because the land is no more than hills.  Israel was successful in
   establishing its own state because it occupied the Mediterranean
   seashore."


   "Why They Are Afraid Of Establishing Federalism In The South Of Iraq?"


   Al-Bayyan (Affiliated with the Hezbollah Movement in Iraq) (8/23)
   editorialized:  "One day, the late Saudi King Fahad was asked why he
   asked Washington and London to not support the Shi'ites during their
   uprising in 1991?  He said that he was afraid that the south of Iraq
   might become a Shi'ite triangle that would extend to all other Arab
   countries in particular the Gulf States.  This speech reminds us of the
   current objections to establishing federalism in south of Iraq....  Why
   do the Iraqi people who live in the south of Iraq suffer from poverty
   when their areas contain a real wealth?  Why they are they always
   exposed to tyranny, mass killing, humiliation and marginalization?  We
   believe in the unity of Iraq.  But, we

   would like to know why Kurdistan only has the right to federalism when
   it appears that no other area has that right....  Some Iraqi groups
   have started to call us separatist.  They don't remember that we were
   the first citizens who supported Iraq's unity.  We lived in poverty and
   suffered tyranny in a wealthy land.  Yet we never stopped supporting
   Iraq's unity.  We are the real advocates of unity and we will support
   any initiative that will unite the country, fight terror and end
   starvation."


   "The Constitutional Changing"


   Jassem Al-Sagher wrote in Baghdad (8/23) (Affiliated with the Iraqi
   National Accord headed by Iyad Allawi):  "The new democratic process in
   Iraq is a unique development for the entire Middle East.  A civilized
   Iraqi political government will emerge from the referendum and the
   coming election.  It will be structured according to the principles of
   equality, harmony, rule of law, and universal participation.  These
   principles are important for supporting the political process....
   Every country needs strong political institutions in order to maintain
   stability.  Backward countries do not have these institutions....  We
   are on the right path toward democracy.  We began the journey when we
   received our sovereignty, and then we established the TAL....  The TAL
   approves modern democratic principles for Iraq.  These principles
   include the mechanisms of democracy, such as the establishment of the
   Ministry for Human Rights.  Compare our civil society to other
   countries in the region and you will see that we are more advanced.
   Our progress is really a civilized jump for our Arab region."


   "The Kurds And The Constitutional Crisis"


   Independent, anti-coalition Al-Fourat (8/23) carried an editorial by
   Hayan Al-Baghdadi:  "After the first gulf war the American government
   supported the idea of Kurdistan being outside the control of the Iraqi
   government....  The United States did this in order to make friends in
   the region.  They wanted a place where they could launch military and
   intelligence movements in order to topple the former Iraqi
   government....  During this time the Kurds started to form an
   independent government with a parliament and a military (Peshmergas).
   They were able to do this because they felt that the Americans were
   protecting them.  They also were free from the centralized authority.
   This is how Kurdistan became a semi-independent region.  They are
   semi-independent because they need financial and political aid.  This
   is why they are now arguing over Kirkuk....  The Iraqis will never let
   go of Kirkuk.  Nor will they agree to let the Kurds have it.  It is a
   Kurdish conspiracy to cut Kirkuk from our unified Iraq for their own
   special interests.  The question is, will the Kurds succeed in forcing
   their allies to stand with them against the Iraqi will for unity?  If
   they do, they will be cursed by history for the rest of time....  We
   can assure the Iraqis that the rest of the Kurds and its national
   powers in our northern regions reject any idea of separation from
   mother Iraq....  Because they know that an independent Kurdistan will
   be an easy target for their neighbors and there will be no one around
   to help or save them then."


   "Women And The Freedom Of Expression"


   Communist, anti-coalition Al-Mada (8/23) carried an editorial by Amina
   Abdul Aziz:  "By the final deadline for the constitution draft we are
   all expecting a document that will ensure the rights of all Iraqi men
   and women....  Since the beginning of this political process there have
   been demonstrations started in Baghdad from two types of women.  The
   first type has demanded that women have equality with men while the
   other type has rejected the idea of women having equality with men....
   With full respect to all point views, there is a misunderstanding for
   the concept of equality.  The misunderstanding about women's rights,
   duties, and equality between men and women, is due to decades long
   deprivation from expressing free opinions.  A significant gap occurred
   in understanding the real meaning of equality, women's freedom, their
   sacrifices and suffering--for their patience they deserve practical
   participation in ruling the country, which suits their ambitions and
   performance....  Equality means full awareness for the important role
   of women that is ascendant in the new generation, the new future of
   Iraq....  We should have our rights in being nominated for senior
   positions in the Iraqi government, to correct what we believe is not
   right for us and to work toward planning for our new political role in
   Iraq."


   "Frozen Green Zone People"


   Hussain Abdul Abbas Al-Wahili wrote in anti-coalition, independent
   Al-Fourat (8/23):  "I can assure you that the people in the frozen
   green zone do not know anything about the change of seasons, they do
   not know that we are now in summer and the heat in Baghdad is at peak
   temperature.  To prove what I am talking about, they are still wearing
   suits and jackets with ties; they fasten their jackets and they seem
   that they are shaking when they appear on TV as if it were still
   winter.  Are they shaking because they are feeling so cold inside the
   frozen green zone, or are they shaking in fear?....  Perhaps it's
   because they are embarrassed since they have no answers to the many
   crises we are experiencing regarding the lack of water and power....
   It's as if electricity divorced all Iraqis.  How a thing named
   electricity completely abandoned Iraqis is a beautiful old story we can
   tell our children who gather around the lamp at night; it will begin
   with, 'once upon a time when we enjoyed that lovely element named
   electricity;' and it will continue with water and which was something
   we had in the past and it will go on to something else named
   security....  These are our fairy tales now, how to apologize to your
   neighbor when he abuses your rights and how to stay silent when someone
   occupies your land....  They all live in the green zone.  Iraqi
   government and national assembly members, the ministers and the
   coalition, and all other employees working with them and that is why
   they do not know about Iraqis who live outside the green zone and that
   is why they are leading us with Transparency and Democracy."


   "The Calamity Named The Upcoming Constitution"


   Hady Jallaow Mariy opined inpro-government Al-Dawa (8/23):  "There are
   three basic political factions asking for demands, insisting on them,
   and showing their opposition to it....  The first is the Kurds, who
   dream of a separate province.  The second is the Sunnis who want the
   opposite of the Kurds.  The last is the Shia who believe in the
   necessity of finishing the constitution on time; they also have
   limitations in what they're willing to relinquish.  It's not only
   politicians who are committed like them, it's the majority of Iraqis
   who believe in this commitment....  At the same time, some factions are
   calling for the refusal of certain issues in the constitution, which
   are related to federalism, because they believe it will divide the
   country....  The problem is how will Iraqis convince those with
   intertwined attitudes about the constitution?  Especially since there
   are wide sectors of the populace still suffering from abuses inflicted
   by the former regime and it activities....  Parliamentary block leaders
   are responsible for reaching the final accord, and that can be achieved
   through concessions.  The results will be in the interests of the Iraqi
   people because any more postponement or dissolution of the National
   Assembly will take Iraq back to the first step, and that sequences will
   reflect negatively on the Iraqi people, which is dangerous....  The
   Iraqi people are waiting for the results of the upcoming negotiations
   with anxiety."


   "Iraqi Constitution And The Dialogue Of The Deaf"


   Jihad Al-Khazin commented in Iraq 4 All News in Arabic (8/23):  "It
   might be true that the constitutional committee had completed 90% of
   the draft before its August 15th deadline, but its also true that the
   remaining 10% is the largest source of disagreement among the three
   main groups....  In fact, the deliberations have shed light on how deep
   the differences are among Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds.  These
   differences led the negotiators to give themselves another week for
   deliberations despite pressure from the United States.  They went into
   the extension with no practical program for reaching a solution for
   problems that prevented their agreement in the first place....  The
   Shiites demand a federal region in the south that would enable them to
   benefit from its oil resources.  The Kurds in the north also want their
   own federal region but they oppose the idea of Islam as the main source
   of legislation....  The 15 Sunni Constitutional Committee members have
   threatened to withdraw from the process if Shiites and Kurds

   continue to insist on these concessions....  The United States has
   pressured all parties to give up their points and reach an agreement.
   Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, expressed disappointment over the
   postponement after acting as the 72nd member of the committee.  Maybe
   he was even the first....  Federalism is the first step in the plan to
   divide Iraq.  The Shiites and Kurds are already talking about the next
   step, which is autonomy....  It is a real possibility that the failure
   of this process could lead to a civil war.  That kind of war could
   already be on the way, even though no one is talking about it yet.  We
   are suffering from insane terrorism that could not be described as a
   resistance movement.  It is claiming many lives on daily basis.  While
   the United States, which put Iraq in these circumstances, is trying to
   emphasize the positive side of the situation that just doesn't exist."


   "Concession Over Self-Determination"


   Venus Fa'iq editorialized in Al-Rafidayn Web Site in Arabic (8/23):
   "News of Kurdish concessions over the right of self-determination
   didn't have any shocking impact on my soul....  Since I did speculate
   that Kurds would end up with nothing....  I would have liked to ask
   Kurdish officials the question:  When did Kurds have any rights to give
   up in the first place, and could they give them up without going back
   to their people?....  I don't know what rights Kurds will have after
   this concession and after agreeing that Islam should be the main source
   of legislation--these two points alone are enough to suppress the
   Kurdish people in a civilized manner right under the world's sight....
   We should point out that the American position changed during the
   night.  Americans, whom Kurds thought were keen on Kurdish rights and
   were their strongest ally ever, have turned their back on Kurds in
   favor of Shiites, the neighbors of Iran....  I can't think how any
   attention could be given towards Kurdish demands anymore, even in
   Kirkuk, especially after Al-Sistani's fatwa.  I believe Kirkuk will be
   the next step in the series of concessions and I hope I'm wrong."


   "Iraq, Uniqueness Of The Constitutional Battle....  The Uniqueness Of
   The Iraqi Case"


   Ameer Al-Taheri commented in Soat Al-Iraq, The Voice of Iraq in Arabic
   (8/23):  "Does the national assembly's decision to postpone the
   discussion of the draft constitution represent a major setback for Iraq
   that has just been freed from a dictatorship or is it merely a minor
   event on the road to democracy?....  Failure to meet the constitutional
   deadline would be considered a drawback for only one reason, it's the
   first time the Iraqi leadership has failed to fulfill a political
   obligation on time since the toppling of the previous regime....
   Despite the prospect of postponement being seen as a  tactical drawback
   for Iraqis, it represents a democratic development in an Iraq that was
   recently freed from decades of dictatorship.  Constitutional committee
   members stood up to pressures from different factions including
   Al-Sistani and the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq....  The vast majority of
   Iraqis are content with the manner through which decisions are made,
   and they're aware that the era where constitutions were imposed by
   tyrants is gone forever, and that no single group can dictate its will
   over others, and most importantly they know it's no longer possible to
   ignore the will of the people....  The discussions around the drafting
   of the constitution have included Iraqis participating in over 300
   conferences enabling 50,000 to express their opinions; in addition to
   the participation of many unions, women's groups, and human rights
   organizations."


   "Citizenship And Sectarianism:  The Difference Between The Sunni And
   Shiite

   Constitution"


   Ali Al-Shlah editorialized in (Iraqi Press Website in Arabic -
   www.iraqipapers.com/dustoor_6_6_5_ali.htm) (8/22):  "Iraq is ruled by
   one sect which nobody used to talk about.  Now sectarianism is a
   familiar topic of conversation, since the government is comprised of
   Iraqi people from all spectrums!....  Which group committee members
   identify with or not, as well as their qualifications, have become main
   concerns for Iraqis because it is a hot Iraqi and international Arab
   issue.  This point was taken to such extremes that when Secretary of
   State Rice visited Iraq and demanded that the Prime Minister guarantee
   a larger role for Sunnis in drafting the constitution, nobody claimed
   that this was ethnic power sharing.  But it seems that this topic only
   comes up when the government is faced with the necessity of giving
   non-Sunnis their rights (or not) in the political process....  Iraqis
   had problems with Saddam's regime not because he was Sunni but because
   he was a criminal.  People would have turned against him even if he had
   been Shi'ite.  Why do people say that every anti-terrorist operation is
   against Sunnis?....  I wish that I had heard the protesters on the
   Constitutional Drafting Committee say that they opposed the committee
   because it excluded an Iraqi legal advisor.  But, to oppose it because
   they concluded it didn't have enough Sunnis isn't a good enough
   reason.  The committee is considered sectarian because the leaders of
   the Sunnis convinced their group to boycott the elections.  Then those
   very same leaders demanded a big portion of the cake through
   terrorizing others with the threat of a boycott, though Sunnis did not
   elect the Sunni spokespersons.  They are not legitimate.  The
   government responded to their blackmail with support from abroad to the
   extent that I'm afraid that Sunni extremists will boycott the upcoming
   elections to get more than they could get in a free and fair election.
   In that manner they will continue to assume more power and get away
   with their grandstanding.  The written constitution won't differentiate
   between one Iraqi and another and it won't favor one sect over
   another.  Political leaders should all concentrate on writing a
   patriotic constitution and not sectarianism one."


   "Constitutional Discussions"


   SCIRI-affiliated Al-Adala (8/22) in Arabic carried and editorial by Ali
   Khalif:  "The current discussions on the constitution among the Iraqi
   politicians represent a very important step in Iraq's journey to
   democracy.  However, it seems as though every political group is trying
   to impose its own agenda on the constitution....  There are some who
   hold political opinions that do not serve the Iraqi national interest.
   For example, those who oppose the idea of federalism in Iraq might have
   accepted it if they had natural resources in their own provinces.  If
   we believe in democracy and freedom we must not be afraid of
   federalism....  But I think that some political groups in Iraq are
   selfish and because of that they try to dominate all other groups.
   These are the groups that accept the idea of Kurdish federalism while
   at the same time refusing the concept of establishing federal
   territories in any other part of Iraq....  Nevertheless, the current
   constitutional process represents a great achievement and the Iraqi
   politicians who have taken the lead in this process must complete the
   task of drafting a constitution that meets the needs of all Iraqi
   people.  We do not like anyone to make use of this achievement to make
   it a platform to launch bombastic slogans.  The Iraqi people want to
   live in peace and they want to enjoy their fair share of Iraqi wealth
   and natural resources."


   "Why Are We Afraid Of Federalism"


   Sa'eed Abdul Hadi wrote in Independent As-Sabah (8/22):  "Until
   yesterday, federalism was an obstacle in the way of reaching an
   agreement on the constitution draft.  As everyone knows there is a
   Shiite-Kurdish agreement on federalism.  However, the Sunnis call for
   non-centralism of provinces and totally refuse federalism.  The Arab
   Sunnis think that federalism will lead to the unfair distributing of
   natural resources among provinces.  We do not know the reason behind
   such fear since the Iraqi politicians unanimously agreed on the
   distribution of natural resources....  The Western media focuses on the
   positive points of federalism and how important it is for Iraq's
   development.  The conservative Pan Arab media outlets severely attack
   federalism in Iraq.  We feel that they attack federalism in Iraq
   because they want to defend their own political establishment.  Those
   establishments would be threatened if federalism succeeded in Iraq....
   The Arab countries are still governed by tyrannical regimes.  Those
   regimes give a very good picture of what is called the eastern
   tyranny.  The so-called progressive Arab press opposes the rights of
   Iraqis to establish their own federalism.  Administrative federalism in
   Iraq is necessary because it would restore the confidence of our many
   ethnic groups.  We must not say bad things about each other.  We must
   not say things like; Sunnis refuse federalism because they want to
   implement a nationalist Arab

   project for the sake of our neighbors or accuse the Shiites of being
   involved in an Iranian plan in Iraq.  These accusations come from those
   who want to destroy Iraqi confidence and encourage sectarianism....
   What will the Shiites lose if a central government was established that
   represented the majority in Iraq?  What will the minority Sunnis
   benefit from having a central government?  There must be a national
   movement in Iraq and honest Arab writers must support this move....
   Iraq is moving forward and the democratic process will never stop.
   Disagreements among Iraq's Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds are a healthy
   point in this process."


   "The Disagreement Points Are Increasing"


   Majed Fadhel Al-Zaboon opined in independent, anti-coalition Al-Fourat
   (8/22):  "Despite the Constitution Drafting Committee's announcement
   that the political parties working on the Constitution have resolved
   their differences and reached an agreement, it seems that there are
   still arguing....  In fact they are still trying to reach an agreement
   on sixty-six different points.  How did six points of disagreement turn
   into sixty-six points of disagreement?....  One of my colleagues
   thought that members of the Constitution Drafting Committee would not
   be able to read the constitution articles because there is no
   electricity where he lives.  He lives far away from the International
   Zone so he knows nothing about the concrete walls and unlimited
   electricity.  My other colleague thought that they should schedule
   their discussions about the disagreement points.  The problem with that
   solution is that Arabs want a schedule according to the Arabic
   alphabetic and the Kurds want the Kurdish alphabetic, the same goes for
   others political groups....  Ambassador Khalilzad, our American
   brother, suggested that they use the English alphabet.  Everyone
   respects his wisdom and they liked the idea.  However, he decided to
   add more articles to the Iraqi constitution draft.  When some of the
   Constitution Drafting Committee members protested, he used his veto
   against them!  He has the right to do so because the United States is a
   permanent member in the International Security Council....  This is why
   the members of the Constitution Security Council accept his very
   democratic additions.  They accent federalism, and fit into the
   regional standards that are right for Iraq.  They were so happy with
   Ambassador Khalilzad that they applauded him."


   [Translators note: the author is actually sarcastically criticizing the
   U.S. involvement in writing the Iraqi constitution.]


   "This Morning"


   Independent As-Sabah Al-Jadeed (8/22) carried an editorial by Ismael
   Zayyer:  "The completed constitution will begin the next stage in our
   country's evelopment.  So, do not worry about Qatar.  Do not waste time
   on other issues or other groups and their campaigns against us.  Go
   ahead brothers and ensure our children's future....  This does not mean
   that you should be careless and accept anyone's opinion into the
   Constitution.  But we should stand behind our own opinions about this
   historical document.  It will establish the basic elements for the
   government in the new Iraq....  It is our basic right to participate in
   the referendum and vote for the constitution.  It does not matter what
   your vote.  The most important thing is that we are free to express our
   opinions.  But we should first read the document and understand what it
   means.  We should also discuss the issues raised in this document.
   Then we are prepared to express our opinion toward it....  If we reject
   any interference in our affairs, and refuse to allow the foreigner to
   remain on our land, we should show the world that we are a nation that
   says what is means and has the courage to express its opinions.
   Casting a vote on the constitution is the first step for national,
   Arab, and international recognition.  It is the first step toward
   reconstruction."


   "Dividing Iraq Away From The National Zeal"


   Shamil Abdul Qader commented in independent, anti-coalition Al-Mashriq
   (8/22):  "Some Iraqis have two main ideas about the unity of Iraq.  One
   is that Iraq cannot be divided, and two is that dividing Iraq would be
   an attack against the efforts of the United States to maintain Iraqi
   unity.  However, most Iraqis believe that Iraq will be divided.  They
   think that the governments of Western and Middle Eastern countries have
   planned all along to divide Iraq for the benefit of Middle Eastern
   forces.  The people who love Iraq and its unity view federalism as a
   step backward under the pretext of protecting it from a centralized
   government....  The former United States Civil Administrator for Iraq
   Ambassador Paul Bremmer repeated many times that he refused federalism
   based on sectarian issues.  He maintained that he agreed with
   geographical federalism.  That means that Iraq will be turned into 18
   federal territories instead of 18 provinces....  All Iraqis understand
   that Iraq needs a centralized government for security.  We wonder if
   Al-Ja'afari's government will give us the centralization of the former
   regime.  Iraqis will destroy the idea of division.  Their anger will
   come down on the heads of Iraq's enemies and on the heads of those who
   are trying to finance its division."


   "What Is The Argument For The Constitution?"


   Karekar Abdullah Khushanoo wrote inpro-coalition, PUK affiliated
   Al-Ittihad (8/22):  "In today's session of the Transitional National
   Assembly, the Constitution will either be decided or refused....  In
   support of the Constitution, many press statements have been issued,
   and there have been many meetings for the leaders of the political
   blocks.  Everyone is working on the Constitution's controversial
   issues.  The TNA will present the results to the Iraqi people.
   However, they are bored with the issue and do not want another
   postponement....  The leaders of the political blocks have issued
   statements about the significant restrictions facing them.  If they are
   able to come to an agreement on the constitution draft, that very act
   will save Iraq.  The completed constitution will open up new horizons
   for the Iraqi people and will kick start reconstruction.  The people
   need a break from the their current miserable condition....  When the
   Political Blocks Leaders complete the draft, it will need the approval
   of the TNA.  If the Assembly does not approve the draft the political
   process goes back to the beginning.  It will be destructive to the
   Iraqi people in many ways.  The political, economic, security and
   social consequences of a denial will dishearten the people.  It will
   also mean that after two years of continued suffering, that included a
   dangerous election, they only gained a few benefits....  The elected
   National Assembly should have finished the constitution through the
   efforts of the Constitution Drafting Committee by the first deadline.
   But it failed to reach an accord.  That fact compelled the president to
   have the political blocks to sit together in order to solve the
   restrictions....  The statements are continuing, some are optimistic
   and some are pessimistic that the document will be finished.  A
   decision from the TNA decision will remove these all doubts that the
   government is serious about the future....  We still optimistic that
   the TNA will give us our final draft, if we do not get the draft the
   country will sink into chaos and face continued foreign intervention in
   our internal issues....  Iraqis want a constitution that will protect
   their rights, protect their country, and ensure a bright future for
   their children.  We are waiting for the National Assembly to decide the
   constitution, prepare the referendum and hold the elections."


   JORDAN:  "The Programmed Destruction Of Iraq"


   Rakan Majali wrote in center-left, influential Al-Dustour (8/24):  "It
   is no longer a secret for the Iraqis that the United States is doing
   everything it can to tear Iraq apart while, at the same time, it
   continues to hold on to a loose framework of contradictions and
   struggles within that create an internal Iraqi formula that, in the
   final analysis, makes the breakout of a civil war in Iraq unavoidable
   should the American forces pull out....  Some people believed that the
   destruction was related to the military operations that took place at
   the time of Iraq's occupation, but today it becomes clear that this
   destruction is a programmed strategy within a hatred-filled military,
   political, economic, cultural, and psychological war designed to
   destroy Iraq with the aim of controlling it and making it a model and
   lesson for others."


   "Iraq's Fires Are Not An Internal Issue"


   Chief Editor Taher Udwan commented in independent, mass-appeal Al-Arab
   Al-Yawm (8/24):  "There is a fire raging in Iraq and it is continuously
   growing.  It would be a mistake to give in to the idea that this
   country is the sole concern of the United States or the responsibility
   of the Green Zone government in Baghdad.  What is happening in this
   brotherly country constitutes a disengagement process for the state and
   the society....  Let us stop promoting or supporting the so-called
   political process in Iraq.  This process is not going to lead to
   security, stability, or peace.  It is just a scenario on which
   President Bush and the neo-conservatives are insisting in order to
   create a military and political entity based on sectarian and tribal
   militias with the aim of continuing the war on behalf of the
   Americans....  The Iraqi situation is no longer the sole concern of
   Bush and Blair or even Ja'fari.  It is a regional issue and a blazing
   fire that threatens to consume the entire region."


   "The American Middle Ages"


   Daily columnist Nahed Hattar wrote in independent, mass-appeal Arabic
   daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm (8/22):  "The United States is leaning towards
   accepting the establishment of a kind of a religious state in Iraq.
   The Americans who are in a hurry to leave the Iraqi quagmire are ready
   to abandon their ideological objectives in return for maintaining the
   minimum level of control over their interests in this beleaguered
   country....  One must note, however, that the `religious state' goes
   against the very essence of Iraq's being.  It is no wonder that the
   modern and independent Iraq has moved, always, towards secularism.
   This multi-ethnic country has always sought to guarantee first its
   unity and second its independence from regional powers, thus keeping it
   far away from the reaches of the Wahhabism of the Sunni Arabian
   Peninsula and from the Iranian Shiites.  What the American invaders did
   was that they broke the Iraqi national status and handed Iraq over to
   al-Qaida and the Mullahs of Iran.


   "The Iraqi Constitution And Scheduling The Withdrawal"


   Columnist Khaled Mahadin writes on the op-ed page of semi-official,
   influential Arabic daily Al-Rai (8/22):  "The Iraqi constitution is not
   being written by this committee whose members were elected amidst the
   boycott of a major and influential part of the Iraqi people.  It is
   being written by the status quo and what is happening outside of the
   meeting halls.  If there are terrorists who stand against the political
   process, as the Iraqi government says, and if there are militants who
   do not want this process to succeed, as Washington and London say, then
   no one can claim that these terrorists merit any respect, but it would
   be a grave mistake to claim that these terrorists are not playing a
   role.  The American and British withdrawal from Iraq is a matter of
   time.  The timetable for their withdrawal will not be set by a military
   or political entity in Washington and London, because history has
   taught us that the owners of the land and the rights are the ones who
   set the timetable of the withdrawal of forces that invade their
   countries."


   LEBANON:  "The Constitutional Crisis Is Not Only About Federalism"


   Rafiq Khoury opined in centrist Al-Anwar (8/30):  "It was no surprise
   that the new Iraqi constitution has become a crisis.  Basically, the
   new draft of the constitution reflected the crisis over the national
   identity of Iraq, and the crisis of the American occupation.  The most
   serious crisis, however are differences over whether Iraq should become
   a federation.  The issue of federation in the Arab world has always
   been taboo.  It was never discussed or given serious thought but always
   had a bad reputation....  The Sunnis realized too late that they were
   wrong about their decision to boycott the elections, and have started
   to call for participation in the upcoming referendum and the next
   elections....  What is obvious is that the future is very dangerous for
   Iraq and the Arab world."


   "Federalism And The Remains Of 'Arabism'"


   Bechara Charbel editorialized in independent Al-Balad (8/29):  "Even if
   application of federalism is postponed for six months in Iraq for the
   sake of the Sunnis, this does not mean that Iraq has not become a
   federal country.  We have now a new federal country among the Arab
   countries...It only needs a `yes' in the referendum in order to become
   official.  This new federalism is facing criticism and objections by
   many Arab countries...but it might be the best possible solution for
   Iraq at this time in light of the dramatic developments in Iraq
   following Saddam's imprisonment....  The Sunnis will no longer have
   dominance in Iraq....  The Kurds and the Shiites should never be blamed
   for seeking this new reality....  Their suffering during the
   dictatorship that `united' Iraq is enough of an excuse....  In any
   case, Iraq was united only because it was under a dictatorship."


   "The Last Stop"


   Sateh Noreddine wrote in Arab nationalist As-Safir (8/23):
   "Formulating the new Iraqi constitution is exclusively a Lebanese
   event.  The text will not just be a principal law to which Iraqis refer
   in order to form their next state....  It will be the first American
   text that represents a reference to use every time the U.S. prepares a
   program for change in any of the countries of the Middle East including
   Lebanon....  The answers that America will provide to questions of
   identity, nationalism, regime and even the role of women will not be
   limited to the Iraqi state that has no country to resemble it in the
   region more than Lebanon.  Despite differences in particularities
   between the two countries, still the word federalism, which has become
   an item in the Iraqi constitution, is enough to wage the civil war in
   Lebanon again.  Lebanese anticipation of the new American text is
   stronger and more difficult than that of other Arab and Islamic
   countries....  There is only one essential difference between the two
   countries that the Americans would take into consideration when the
   time comes to rebuild the Lebanese state.  It is the Israeli issue
   which cannot be postponed in Lebanon as it is currently in Iraq."


   "Iraq And The Region:  (The Phase) Preceding Hamourabi"


   Rafic Khoury opined in centrist Al-Anwar (8/23):  "Writing the Iraqi
   constitution is firstly and lastly a kind of restructuring of the
   nation, the regime and the state.  It is not an easy task to perform
   through dialogue in the presence of the American occupation, and the
   existing imbalance between the Iraqi entities, and the conflict of
   interest among regional countries that are getting involved in the
   security situation one way or another....  Stumbling on writing the
   constitution does not come as a surprise.  Agreement under the pressure
   of time will only mean a postponement of the problem....  the major
   complication is federalism that is considered by some a step towards
   division, and by others a way to avoid division and uphold unity....
   The bigger problem is that the winds of this dangerous kind of
   federalism is sweeping the region and most certainly reaching Lebanon."


   "What Autumn In Lebanon And The Region?"


   Rafic Khoury commented in centrist Al-Anwar (8/20):  "The picture of
   the region seems rosy in the mirror of U.S. Secretary of State
   Condoleeza Rice.  She sees `something very dramatic changing in the
   Middle East,' as she told the New York Times.  What she is talking
   about is separate events that she ties with the course of the American
   policy and places them within the context of her `achievements' during
   seven months in office....  Rice sees a unique and unusual moment that
   extends from spring to autumn.  In spring there was the Syrian
   withdrawal from Lebanon and the parliamentary elections...in summer
   there was the Gaza withdrawal...but in fall there is the Iraqi
   referendum over the constitution....  However, selecting a group of
   pictures does not draw the whole scene....  The battle in Iraq will not
   finish even if all parties agree on writing the constitution....  She
   knows that the American policy has lost its force of momentum,
   convincing and even pressure.  Isn't Iran the biggest winner in Iraq
   and Afghanistan?....  The distinguished autumn that Rice is
   anticipating in Iraq, Afghanistan and Egypt is the autumn of fear that
   Lebanon expects.  The fear in the weeks that precede the report of the
   UN investigation committee and the fear that will follow....  Can Rice
   make the fear go away or is there that which may increase that fear in
   Washington's policies?"


   SYRIA:  "Federalism, Or A Foundation For Partition?"


   An unsigned editorial in government-owned Al-Ba'th commented (8/23):
   "When the U.S. declared war on Iraq it was implementing an accurate
   plan to serve its vital interests in the region....  The 'divide and
   rule' principle was on the agenda of the U.S. Administration when it
   drafted the State Administration Law.  There was nothing in that law to
   safeguard and respect the unity of the Iraqi people or the unity and
   sovereignty of the State on its entire territory as an indivisible
   whole.  Indeed, the law paved the way for departure from the unity of
   Iraq and its people when it entrenched the sectarian and ethnic quota
   system....  Under Iraq's current circumstances, the call for the
   establishment of various federal regions would undoubtedly dwarf Iraq
   and open the door for a new Sykes-Picot.  Perhaps what the advocates of
   division want most is to end historical Iraq and forcibly remove it
   from its Arab environment and turn it into cantons linked to one
   another, at best, by nominal bonds.  Indeed, that would be the tool for
   digging trenches of endless wars among the federal regions, leading to
   isolationism and exclusion and the establishment for full division....
   But the American objective of dwarfing Iraq through the recipe of
   federalism as a prelude to dismantling the Iraqi state as we have known
   it since its establishment in 1921 and ending the Iraqi national entity
   is not easy to realize."

   "Memory Of Geography And A Bloody Tragedy"

    Ali Qasim, a commentator in government-owned Al-Thawra, wrote (8/22):
   "The future of Iraq is at a crossroad....  Steps are being taken behind
   the scene to create a dark future for Iraq....  The most tragic
   chapters in the history of Iraq and the whole region have not yet
   started.  After occupation, Iraq witnessed a series of controversial
   measures that appeared as a moment of declaring chaos, spreading alarm,
   and then causing successive collapses in Iraq's special character.  And
   many signs of the hidden intentions that govern Iraq's political
   destiny appeared directly on the surface.  All this caused the bloody
   episodes of unjustified death and the suspicious calls for sectarian
   and ethnic divisions in Iraq, which threaten to blow up the country's
   political future....  The anti-federalism demonstrations in Iraq were
   an expression of the rejection of a looming danger, the repercussions
   of which, the Iraqis can no longer afford and the heavy price of which,
   they can no longer pay.  They have paid enough with their lives and
   blood for a sin they did not commit.  Consequently, no one can trade in
   the lives and blood of the remaining Iraqis to serve the temporary
   narrow interests of groups that do not represent the Iraqi reality or
   express its characteristics."


   EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC


   AUSTRALIA:  "Trapped By Their Own Folly"


   An op-ed from editor-at-large Paul Kelly in the national conservative
   Australian (8/24) asserted:  "The fissures over the unfolding failures
   in Iraq have permeated the Bush administration, the U.S. military and
   the Republican establishment--and the Howard Government cannot defy a
   reckoning on its Iraq policy.  George W. Bush has no credible story to
   offer the American public about Iraq.  Divisions are opening within his
   administration and there is now an unspeakable reality--on balance,
   Iraq under Saddam Hussein was less a threat to U.S. strategic interests
   than is Iraq today.  The very best outcome the U.S. will procure in
   Iraq now is a moderate Islamic state.  The worst is either a civil war
   or the entrenchment in parts of the country of extremist Islamist
   political power that becomes a focus of anti-Western terrorism and
   regional de-stabilization....  Bush is trapped by his own folly.  Bush
   wanted to do Iraq on the cheap.  He never had enough troops or a proper
   plan or a sense of the risks.  Now he is trapped between the commitment
   needed to beat the insurgency and the pressures for an exit strategy.
   Howard is trapped with him."


   CHINA:  "Iraqis Wonder If Constitution Is An Iraqi Or A U.S. Product"


   Jiang Xiaofeng commented in the official Xinhua Daily Telegraph (Xinhua
   Meiri Dianxun) (8/25):  "For this constitution that is so difficult to
   produce, the U.S. has made great efforts to promote the process....
   People have to doubt that whether or not the constitution belongs to
   Iraq or the U.S.  During the two and a half years after the Iraq war,
   the U.S. has made every effort to promote Iraq's democratization.  This
   seems to be the only reason for initiating the Iraq war that the Bush
   administration could use to convince the public, and also the excuse
   that the U.S. military uses to continuously delay withdrawal from
   Iraq.  Since the U.S. will hold mid-term elections next year, the
   Republicans need the Iraq issue to gain votes.  If there is problem
   with the Iraq issue, the Bush administration does not know what to say
   to the public.  The post-war Iraq reconstruction is a bet the U.S.
   cannot lose.  Since the U.S. efforts did not bring a smooth drafting of
   an Iraqi constitution, this indicates the U.S. reform plan for the
   Middle East will also have many troubles."


   CHINA (HONG KONG SAR):  "Iraqi People Losing Out In Democratic Process"


   The independent English-language South China Morning Post said in an
   editorial (8/22):  "The democracy that Iraqis were promised by the U.S.
   when it led an invasion almost 2-1/2 years ago and overthrew dictator
   Saddam Hussein is far from being fulfilled.  Worse, the process is
   being compromised by religious and ethnic disputes, foreign pressure
   and hasty, ill-judged, decision- making.  Another deadline expires
   tonight for interim lawmakers to conclude drafting the country's new
   constitution.  With no more delays permitted, an inability to reach
   consensus on the key divisive issues of religion and autonomy will push
   back Iraqi self-rule by as much as a year....  What the constitution
   lays down is a matter for Iraqis to determine.  But drafters need to
   keep in mind their obligation to ensure that the people of Iraq are
   given the freedoms denied under Hussein--which are already adequately
   mapped out by international law.  A government-sanctioned decision to
   execute three men in coming days is at odds with those rules.  So, too,
   is the lack of access lawyers and families are being given to the
   dozens of members of Hussein's government who are in American custody
   and awaiting trial.  The executions, the first since the invasion, were
   approved by a legal system that, as yet, has no constitutional
   approval.  There is no basis for the use of the death penalty under
   international law....  The wrong signals are being sent to Iraqis.
   There are many permutations of democracy, but the type they are
   increasingly being offered benefits some more than others.  It is a
   situation lawmakers must rectify now, before it is too late."


   "Drafting The New Iraqi Constitution Encounters Difficulties"


   The pro-PRC Chinese-language Macau Daily News remarked in an editorial
   (8/21):  "All factions that participated in the drafting of the new
   constitution have failed to come to a consensus on major questions of
   principle.  Hence, they missed the August 15 deadline to submit the
   draft to the National Assembly....  According to the amended temporary
   constitution, if the draft of the new constitution is not submitted to
   the National Assembly on August 22, the National Assembly will need to
   be dismissed automatically.  A new election will be held to elect a
   transitional National Assembly.  Then the whole process will be back to
   square one again, as in January before the election was held.  It will
   deal a heavy blow to the Iraqi political process.  This outcome is
   unacceptable to all parties especially the Bush administration, which
   is facing greater pressure to withdraw its troops from Iraq....  All of
   the factions have had extensive negotiations.  Whether they can resolve
   their fundamental differences within one week and make major
   concessions is totally unpredictable.  Nevertheless, it is not good for
   the U.S. administration to be 'over energetic' on the drafting of the
   Iraqi constitution because it will only give an impression that the
   drafting of the constitution is guided by the U.S.  Such an impression
   will increase people's doubt about Iraqi leaders and it will lead to an
   opposite result."


   INDONESIA:  "Let Iraqis Decide Their Own Destiny"


   Muslim intellectual Republika (8/29) stated:  "Let the Iraqis decide
   their own destiny, including the drafting of their constitution.  There
   should not be any external intervention, in particular from the United
   States.  Indications of the U.S.' interference are surfacing,
   especially now that many Americans are demanding that their government
   withdraw its troops immediately.  If there is foreign intervention, we
   are worried that Iraq will endure incessant conflicts in the future.
   For other nations--especially those where Muslims make up the majority,
   including Indonesia--it is important to follow developments in Iraq,
   because what happens in Iraq will have global impact, especially in the
   Middle East."


   "Draft Of Iraq Constitution"


   Leading independent Kompas (8/24) reported:  "The crisis in drafting
   Iraq's Constitution has ended after an agreement was reached this
   week.  Various sensitive issues, such as the role of Islam in the
   state, controversy over the federalism system, and the apportionment of
   oil, have been settled through compromises.  The three issues have made
   the negotiation process tough, forcing the negotiation deadline to be
   extended....  The compromises reached in the drafting process
   demonstrated to the Iraqi public that the elites were not only able to
   compete and be in conflict, but they were also able to work together
   for a more democratic, just, peaceful, and prosperous Iraq in the
   future."


   MALAYSIA:  "Waiting For A Constitution"

   The government-influenced English language New Straits Times
   editorialized (8/28):  "The fault has been laid squarely on the
   representatives of the 20 per cent Sunni minority who, under Saddam,
   had lorded over the Shias and Kurds.  The Sunnis had largely boycotted
   the elections and been wheedled into the constitution-writing committee
   only at America's insistence.  Formulating a basic law upon the
   fractious plurality of Iraq was always going to be difficult,
   especially with sectarian and ethnic lines sharpened by an unequal
   distribution of oil.  But the Sunnis, leveraging on the insurgency, had
   been hoisted into a position to make or break any deal.  Worried about
   excessive autonomy for the Kurds and Shias, whose regions contain most
   of the country's oil, and the nuking of Saddam's Baath Party, they duly
   chose deadlock.  They have been bolstered by the Americans, who have
   pressured the Shias to bring the Sunnis 'on board' and take the sting
   out of the violence in the so-called Sunni triangle west of
   Baghdad....  Yet, whatever the Sunnis' valid objections, federalism is
   clearly the only workable way forward....  What the Iraqis and the
   Americans do not have, however, is the luxury of time.  Democracy, and
   its legal framework, cannot be built in a hurry.  But its progress in
   Iraq is being forced with indecent haste by the Bush administration's
   longing for trophies to buttress the occupation's waning support at
   home.  The coalition troops are squeezed by the dilemma of being both a
   help and a hindrance to Iraqi self-determination.  The Iraqis must pull
   together, refute the world's misgivings of their political maturity,
   and pack the foreign soldiers off as soon as possible."

   CENTRAL AND SOUTH ASIA


   INDIA:  "In The Land Of Hammurabi"


   Hamid Ansari wrote in centrist The Hindu (8/26):  "The commitment, in
   the Preamble, is unexceptionable.  Sandwiched between the past and the
   future, however, is an unpleasant present that cannot be wished
   away....  The new Iraq is to be democratic, federal and parliamentary
   with Islam as its official religion and 'a basic source of
   legislation.'  It is to be multiethnic, multi-religious and multi-sect,
   and is to have Arabic and Kurdish as its official languages.  It is to
   be a part of the Islamic world and its Arab people are to be a part of
   the Arab nation....  Principles for the conduct of foreign policy are
   carefully prescribed in Chapter One itself.  'Iraq shall abide by the
   principles of good neighborliness and by not intervening in the
   internal affairs of other countries.'  It shall seek peaceful
   resolution of disputes, shall respect international obligations, and
   'shall respect its international commitments regarding
   non-proliferation, non-development, non-production, and non-use of
   nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.'"

   "Riddled With Contradictions"

    The centrist Hindu editorialized (8/25):  "The political parties that
   dominate the executive and legislative branches hope they will be able
   to evolve a consensus [prior to the National Assembly vote].  This hope
   might prove futile since the draft is riddled with contradictions....
   Secular forces in the country believed that the United States, for its
   own reasons, would not tolerate the emergence of a theocracy.  To their
   dismay, Ambassador Khalilzad played a major role in persuading the
   drafting committee to include the Islamist provisions.  This was part
   of an effort to get the support of conservative Shia parties for the
   draft constitution so that Washington could claim that the transition
   to a democratic and sovereign Iraq was on schedule.  Iraq's women and
   religious minorities might not have the strength to confront the
   conservatives.  However, Sunnis have the incentive and the means to
   derail the constitution-making exercise....  Washington, which is
   desperately keen on showing that its policy is `on track', has again
   forced Iraqis to act against their own interests."


   "Although There Is An Elected Government In Iraq, There Is A Lack Of
   Consensus Vis-A-Vis The New Constitution"


   The centrist Gujarati daily Gujaratmitra (8/19) noted:  "Despite the
   formation of a government in Iraq after the January 2005 elections,
   there seems to be a complete absence of consensus on the creation of a
   new constitution for the strife-torn country.  Even the U.S. feels
   disillusioned, as there is no understanding among all concerned on this
   issue....  The U.S. invaded Iraq on the pretext of establishing
   democracy there.  However, from Day One, America has been facing
   hindrances in achieving this objective in Iraq.  The U.S., caught
   between the growing discontent back home and the increasing number of
   American casualties in Iraq, is looking for a respectful exit from
   Iraq.  The U.S. authorities hoped that the introduction of a new
   constitution would offer the U.S forces an honorable ruse to move out
   of Iraq.  The bone of contention among the warring parties on the Iraqi
   constitution is whether Iraq should or shouldn't be an Islamic nation.
   The U.S. wants Iraq to be identified as a secular democratic nation.
   However, looking at the present scenario, it seems America's efforts
   will not fructify unless there is consensus on this issue."


   "On The Brink"


   The centrist Times of India (8/20) noted:  "With the failure to meet
   the August 15 deadline to write a new constitution, as well as the
   Baghdad bombings that targeted Shias coming from the country's south,
   Iraq may be standing on the edge of a precipice.  None of the exercises
   that the American had hoped would quell the violence have worked.  The
   arrest of Saddam Hussein in December 2003, the handover of sovereignty
   in June 2004, and elections held in January this year.  There are
   fundamental disagreements between the country's principal ethnic
   groups-Shias, Kurds and Sunni Arabs-which is holding up the writing of
   a new constitution.  These disagreements pertain to the nature and even
   the existence of Iraq....   Meanwhile, a steadily rising toll of
   American servicemen is sapping the American will to stay in Iraq.  As
   the popular support attracted by Cindy Sheehan's vigil near President
   Bush's vacation ranch shows, domestic opinion is shifting against
   continuing American presence in Iraq.  A sudden American withdrawal,
   however, would have catastrophic consequences.  Without any legitimate
   authority in Iraq, the country is likely to plunge into civil war.  By
   destroying existing arrangements and putting nothing in its place, the
   Americans have brought about the very failed state and incubator of
   jehad that, ironically was proffered as the reason for invading Iraq in
   the first place.  The only things that may work now is if the Americans
   could persuade the UN to take its place Iraq."


   PAKISTAN:  "Nostalgia For The Saddam Days"


   Karachi-based, center-left English language Dawn declared (8/28):
   "Nobody could have believed that there would be a pro-Saddam march in
   Iraq within two and a half years of the fall of Baghdad.  On Friday,
   marchers at a rally in Baquba raised slogans in favor of former
   president Saddam Hussein and denounced the constitution now under
   preparation.  Their main cause of concern was that Iraq should not have
   a federal constitution.  Such a system, they feared, would lead to
   their country's disintegration.  Iraq's Sunnis are opposed to
   federalism, so are most of the Shias; only the Kurds are keen on a
   federal scheme.  Firebrand Shia cleric Moqtada al Sadr has come out
   against a federal constitution and said it would be rejected by the
   people when it is put to vote....  More than the constitutional
   controversy, the Baquba march represents the frustration of the Iraqi
   people over the chaos in their country....  Sources in Washington say
   troop levels in Iraq will depend on the fate of the constitution.  The
   draft will stand scrapped if it is rejected even by three provinces.
   In that event, one could expect a continuation of the American military
   presence in Iraq and more bloodshed and anarchy.  No wonder, there
   should be nostalgia for Saddam's days when Iraq did not have freedom
   but at least it was peaceful."


   "Iraqi Draft Constitution And Sunni Apprehensions"


   The independent Urdu daily Din (8/26):  "The Iraqi PM has very
   confidently said that he is presenting the draft constitution to the
   parliament for approval.  He has that there is unanimity on 151 out of
   153 sections and there would be agreement on the remaining two as well;
   but the Sunni community denies this.  It says that the agreement is
   between the Shias and the Kurds, Sunnis are not part of it....  If
   Sunnis do not agree to the draft constitutions, the Sunni provinces
   would reject it at the time of referendum.  This would worsen the
   situation, as American and British troops would only leave once a new
   Iraqi assembly comes into being after the constitution is approved and
   adopted.  However, if as Sunnis are threatening, the constitution is
   not approved, a new constituent assembly would have to be formed which
   will start the process from scratch.  Events could move into the wrong
   direction, leading to a civil war, Iraq's disintegration, etc, etc, and
   create an overall negative impact on the Middle East.  If the issue is
   oil, the Sunni leadership's logic that the issue can be resolved by
   dividing Iraq is incomprehensible.  The matter must be resolved by
   removing apprehensions about the real issue so that the country can
   benefit from a democratic system.


   "Iraq's Disputed Basic Law"


   Center-right national English daily The Nation (8/24) editorialized:
   "Apparently, Shias and Kurds could no longer resist the U.S. pressure
   to iron out their differences over the country's draft constitution by
   the extended deadline of August 22 and were able to submit an 'agreed'
   version to the Parliament hours before the midnight.  But that does not
   presage that embattled Iraq is finally set on the road to a peaceful,
   constitutional future; for, even if these two communities succeed in
   genuinely resolving their differences over vital issues like the source
   of law (reconciling the Kurd demand for a secular constitution with the
   Shia insistence on making Islam the basis of law and allowing clerics
   to play a political role), the discontented Sunni factor could very
   well ditch the entire exercise.   Mr. Naseer al-Ani, a Sunni member of
   the constitutional committee, complained, "I haven't seen what has been
   written...until this moment we can't say that the issues have been
   agreed upon....."  The present Iraqi scenario is quite scary, thanks to
   the U.S. role since the First Gulf War.  Kurds have for so long enjoyed
   autonomy that they would like to capitalize on it by getting more
   concessions, which neighboring countries having Kurdish population
   would resent.  Shias, so far denied their due place, would be loath to
   cede too much ground.  Sunnis, once the ruling elite, feel driven to
   the wall.  Reconciliation, though the best course to get rid of the
   foreign invaders, seems a distant dream.


   "Iraq's New Constitution: Aspect That Needs Attention"


    An editorial in the pro-Muslim league (N) Urdu daily Pakistan (8/23)
   remarked:  "There has been no agreement among Iraqi leaders on the
   draft of the new constitution....  A careful review of the Iraqi
   situation would reveal that the real issue is dispute over oil wealth.
   The Sunnis fear they would not get any share from this wealth if the
   country is given a federal system of government.  The issue of
   provincial authority is also linked to the distribution of oil wealth.
   The Kurds, Shias, and Sunnis must understand that they all stand to
   lose if they do not act equitably--only the imperialist [power] would
   be victorious, the real objective of whose attack was control over
   oil."


   "Situation In Iraq:  International Community Should Fulfill Its
   Obligations"


   An editorial in the Karachi-based Taliban mouthpiece Islam (8/23)
   commented:  "The instability in Iraq is a matter of great concern for
   the entire world.  All the dreams of freedom, peace and justice after
   the toppling of Saddam's dictatorial government have proved to be
   mirages.  Even if a mutually agreed constitution is penned down, there
   is no likelihood that the incidents of violence would recede because
   the resistance forces in Iraq have no interest in the formulation of
   Constitution.  Therefore, there is no likelihood of an improvement in
   the situation in Iraq in the near future."


   "Allied Forces Should Also Play Role For Peace, Stability In Iraq"


   An editorial in the leading mass circulation Urdu daily, Jang (8/23)
   commented:  "According to reports, some seven thousand U.S. on-duty
   troops have refused to resume duties in Iraq while about 150 of them
   have sought political asylum in Canada.  The refusal of seven thousand
   U.S. troops to resume their duties in the unjustified war on Iraq,
   against the voice of their conscience, is a matter of great concern for
   the entire international community.  Especially those countries that
   supported the U.S. aggression in Iraq should contemplate why such a
   situation has arisen.  Even if after holding the elections under an
   interim constitution and the formation of parliament and a democratic
   government in Iraq, the sequence of bloodshed, killings of innocents,
   kidnapping of diplomats and blowing up of vital installations is not
   abetting then it is a proof that the people of Iraq are not ready to
   bear the presence of foreign forces on their land.  But in the absence
   of a comprehensive infrastructure, the withdrawal of allied forces
   would further push the country towards an unending fire of civil war."


   WESTERN HEMISPHERE


   CANADA:  "Iraq's Draft Constitution"


   The leading, centrist Globe and Mail opined (8/24):  "Like every other
   aspect of democratic nation-building, crafting a constitution that
   meets the needs of a diverse population and various competing political
   interests is no easy task.  It is particularly difficult in a country
   such as Iraq, with its history of authoritarian rule and its
   instability, violence and bitter ethnic and sectarian divisions.
   Compromise and accommodation have not been part of the Iraqi political
   vocabulary....  The original idea was to produce a consensus blueprint
   that laid a solid foundation for a liberal democracy governed by the
   rule of law and respectful of minority rights.  This was seen as an
   important weapon in the fledgling government's battle against the
   bloody insurgency.  Instead, the Shia and Kurdish leaders have put
   their own religious and secular interests ahead of the country's needs,
   proposing a dangerously hobbled government in Baghdad and ensuring that
   the Sunnis, who controlled the levers of power under Saddam Hussein,
   will continue to feel marginalized and threatened....  After winning
   independence from Britain, the United States required years of
   compromise and concessions to come up with a constitution that
   addressed the problems inherent in its initial weak central government
   and loose confederation of largely self-governing states, many of which
   had conflicting interests.  The Iraqis seem to be opting for the
   vulnerable system the Americans originally had, but with the additional
   handicaps of sectarian divisions, a growing insurgency and no
   experience in the practice of democracy.  It is not a promising recipe
   for the future."


   "A Patch-Up Job For Iraq"


   The liberal Toronto Star editorialized (8/24):  "Patching Iraq back
   together after U.S. President George Bush shattered Saddam Hussein's
   repressive Baathist regime was never going to be easy.  After all, Iraq
   is a nation of 27 million split along three vast fault lines:  Shia and
   Sunni Muslim Arabs, and Kurds.  Saddam held it together, just barely,
   with a reign of terror....  What is on offer so far seems to reflect
   the aspirations of the 60 per cent Shia majority that was
   disenfranchised under Saddam, and the 20 per cent Kurdish minority, if
   not the Sunni 20 per cent who ran the country until Saddam's fall.
   While Bush can be faulted for launching a needless war and for bungling
   the occupation, he deserves credit at least for providing a mechanism
   for Iraqis to take the future in their own hands by forging a new
   national accord....  Tinkering to mollify critics may yet occur before
   the National Assembly votes to adopt the pact.  Certainly, basic Sunni
   rights must be respected.  But ultimately the Iraqi people must
   decide.  Sunnis can't dictate terms.  And the system has safeguards.
   Iraqis collectively can say 'no' in an October referendum if they see
   the deal as fatally flawed.  The Sunnis have an effective community
   veto.  They dominate four provinces.  If two-thirds in any three
   provinces reject the deal, it's back to the drawing-board.  Secular
   Iraqis, poor Shias and women may also oppose the deal.  If they do,
   this patch-up job may prove to be a work in progress.  The good news
   is, Iraqis are getting to shape their own destiny."

   "Constitutional Malaise"

   Editorialist Serge Truffaut wrote in intellectual, nationalist Le
   Devoir (8/23):  "Written almost exclusively by Shiites and Kurds, the
   text will probably be rejected by the Sunnis.  One can speak of a
   project still-born....  [The Sunnis] will compel the Pentagon to delay
   the departure of the troops planned for Spring 2006.  Because, until
   then,...the Sunni revolt...will double its efforts to take the country
   where they want:  total chaos."


   "Iraq's Imperfect Constitution"


   The conservative National Post observed (8/23):  "Iraq's Shiite
   Islamist rulers are threatening to force through parliament a draft
   constitution in the face of fierce opposition from the Sunni minority.
   It is hard to see what good can come of the maneuver, which appears to
   have been backed by U.S. diplomats who had been frantically working in
   the background to ensure that some agreement be reached by yesterday's
   deadline--even an imperfect one.  At worst, the move threatens to
   incite the rage and sense of disenfranchisement of Sunnis, boosting
   support for the insurgency, and worsening the violence in Iraq.  At
   best, it might bring about a fleeting political engagement by Sunnis,
   since if two-thirds of voters in three or more of Iraq's 18 provinces
   vote 'no' in the national referendum in mid-October, the constitution
   will be defeated....  Either way, unless Iraq can address Sunni demands
   in the next three days...hope of national reconciliation for Iraq
   remains elusive....  The transition from Saddam's brutal dictatorship
   to democracy is proving more difficult than most--particularly U.S.
   leaders--could have imagined.  Even the details of the constitution,
   such as a provision that makes Islam 'a main source' for legislation
   and bans laws that contradict 'the fixed principles of the rules of
   Islam,' undermine a key U.S. hope--that a modern, secular democracy
   would emerge in Iraq....  The U.S. may have its prize--a constitutional
   agreement of sorts--but it comes at a cost of further stirring up the
   existing conflict.  Not only does it threaten to fuel Sunni alienation,
   but the fundamental concession by the U.S. to yield to the Shiite
   demand for the inclusion of Islamic law will feed growing concerns
   about the role of Washington's chief rival in the region, Iran's Shiite
   mullocracy, in Iraq's future.  The Pentagon is hoping to begin reducing
   its massive military presence in Iraq by the middle of next year;
   however, it was reported yesterday that contingency plans are being
   made for a 'worst case' that would keep troop levels in Iraq at well
   over 100,000 through 2009.  This is a wise precaution."


   ARGENTINA:  "Iraq:  Constitution In Jeopardy, Rumors Of Civil War"


   Business-financial, pro-U.S. Ambito Financiero said (8/26):
   "Inter-ethnic negotiations aimed at giving Iraq a Constitution were
   almost thwarted last night and this might result in a serious setback
   for George W. Bush's policy in the Arab country.  Hours after the 'sine
   die' suspension in Congress of the session where the bill had to be
   approved, the factions in conflict negotiated feverishly in order to
   avoid a rift of unpredictable consequences.  Despite the lack of
   agreement on the draft that was already presented in Congress, its
   President, Hajim Al-Hassani said negotiations would continue until
   tonight....  The draft of the Constitution sparked warnings from the
   Sunnis on a possible civil war if it's approved, particularly due to
   its opposition to federalism which, they say, will divide the country.
   This ethnic group, with minor representation in Congress, also fears
   the creation of a federal State might give control of the country's
   powerful and rich oil regions of the north to Shiites and Kurds that
   are controlling the Legislative Assembly....  In the meantime, the
   spokesperson of the Iraqi government, Laith Kubba, said Congress
   doesn't need a formal meeting to approve the Constitution because it
   was already delivered last Monday....  The interim administration,
   backed by the U.S., tried to calm tensions down, but violence between
   Mahdi's Army and Mogtada al-Sadr, and rival Shiite groups--resulting
   from the bloody clashes of Sunni insurgents on Wednesday--reduce, even
   further, the hopes that the Constitution issue will be resolved in the
   referendum that will take place in October."


   BRAZIL:  "Crisis In Sight"


   Liberal Folha de S. Paulo (8/24) editorialized:  "The new Constitution
   proposal in Iraq already includes the next crisis, which may result in
   a split in that nation....  The problem is that there is no political
   consensus.  The most powerful groups succeeded in including their main
   aspirations in the project, but did so by practically jettisoning the
   Sunnis from the constitutional process....  Kurds and Shiites have the
   power to approve the Constitution, but it would be a double mistake to
   ignore the Sunnis....  Most important, however, is the fact that the
   Sunnis represent the focus of the insurgence.  Any agreement from which
   they are excluded means the perpetuation or even the intensification of
   the civil war, which could lead to the fragmentation of Iraq."


   "Without Consensus, Deadline Is Just An Anodyne Gesture"


   International writer Luciana Coelho commented in liberal Folha de S.
   Paulo (8/23):  "The delivery of the Constitutional text represents very
   little advance.  Without agreement on a fundamental
   point--federalism--all the gesture permits to think is that the Iraqis
   (or at least the Shiite Arabs) are seriously committed to the deadline
   established by the provisional government and supported by Washington.
   However, no one knows its cost and how it will be fulfilled.  Actually,
   it is worse than that:  the answer the text delivered yesterday allows
   one to foresee is not an encouraging one....  For a nation that intends
   to become, as the U.S. calls, a democracy, it is not a good start. It
   is simplistic and even foolish to attribute the 2003 war merely to
   oil.  However, in the case of the Constitution, under the Iraqi soil is
   exactly where the disagreements are....  The definition of federalism,
   as both Shiites and Kurds want to include in the Constitution, implies
   certain autonomy of the provinces.  The Sunnis fear that such autonomy
   will give the others exclusive power on oil....  Without access to
   Iraq's main wealth, the Sunnis will gain elements to continue promoting
   insurgence in Iraq."


   JAMAICA:  "Iraq's Constitutional Showdown"


   University lecturer and columnist John Rapley writes in the moderate,
   influential Gleaner (8/26):  "Iraq's tortuous constitutional process is
   getting a little smoother.... The Americans are desperate to see this
   go ahead.  They would dearly love to leave Iraq.  Despite White House
   bluster, the insurgency is not on its last legs.  The death toll among
   U.S. soldiers is now zeroing in on 2,000.  As young men and women fail
   to return, anxiety grows on the home front.... The Americans are hoping
   that if Iraqi politicians can agree on a constitution, then elect a new
   government, it might be possible for U.S. troops to begin withdrawing
   as early as next spring.  Though the White House will not commit to a
   deadline, it knows this war could become a liability in future
   elections....  There are plenty of pessimistic scenarios.  The most
   obvious among them is that the constitution fails to provide a rallying
   point to Iraqis, but rather divides them along sectarian lines.  A U.S.
   withdrawal might then leave a vacuum that could quickly give in to
   civil war....  The discussions surrounding the constitution appear to
   reveal a growing sense of exasperation....  There is still the
   possibility that the Sunnis could scuttle the deal...But will
   insurgents...try to play an end-game and intensify the conflict from
   now?  Whatever the outcome, it may well be that some in the White House
   are ruing the day they chose to ignore the advice of those who said
   they'd regret barging into Iraq.

   ##

            Office of Research Issue Focus Foreign Media Reaction

   This site is produced and maintained by the U.S. Department of State.
   Links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement
   of the views contained therein.
   [2]Back To Top
   blue rule
   [3]IIP Home  |  [4]Issue Focus Home

References

   1. file://localhost/
   2. file://localhost/ftp/pub/users/rejjy/Foreign_Media_Reaction/2005/wwwh80530.html#top
   3. file://localhost/
   4. file://localhost/products/medreac.htm