Via the NYT: Constitution Sent to Parliament in Iraq Despite Sunni Objections

Iraqi negotiators finished the country’s new constitution Sunday without the endorsement of Sunni Arabs who helped prepare it, dealing a blow to the Bush administration and setting the stage for a bitter campaign leading up to an October referendum.

To me, now, the question becomes what track do we end up at: a political one in which there is a vote on the constitution and the losers abide by the result and then work within the established system, or violent one, wherein the Sunnis insrugency uses the lack of agreement over the constitution to escalate.

On balance, the litany remains the same:

The 15 members of the Sunni panel said they rejected the document because of disagreements over such issues as federalism, Iraq’s identity and references to Saddam Hussein’s Sunni-dominated Baath Party.

I understand the federalism issue, and also the Baath Party language. But here is where my lack of expertise in the region causes me some confusion: I have no idea why being “just” an Islamic country is insufficient and why the Sunnis specifically want the country declared an “Arb” one as well. Any ideas?

Meanwhile, according to the BBC:

Nonetheless the Sunni representatives vowed to not entirely disengage from the political process, saying that they would play an active role in the elections scheduled for December and calling on all Sunnis in Iraq to register to vote.

May it be so and continue to be such.