Every reason about why Iraqis are divided over the constitution, from Islamic law to oil distribution to Saddam’s tighty whities, has been beaten like a dead camel in the desert. And almost all of these controversial issues have been worked out, getting down to nit-picky arguments about words like a and the. Important words, no doubt, but ones that could be and were eventually resolved through necessary negotiation. The only issue that can’t seem to be resolved is that of federalism, probably the single most divisive and important issue regarding how Iraq will be ruled in the years to come. It’s an issue that has mired the constitution continually, and has now forced President Bush himself to intervene, urging the two sides to cooperate.

President George W. Bush has intervened directly to encourage Iraqis to compromise over a new constitution, reflecting growing fears in Washington that an Iraqi failure to reach consensus could halt political progress in the country.

The White House confirmed on Friday that Mr Bush had placed a call late this week to Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, a key Shia leader, urging that efforts be continued to reach a compromise with Sunni leaders on the text of the draft constitution, which is scheduled to go to a referendum in October.

Trent Duffy, a White House spokesman, told reporters at the president’s Crawford, Texas, ranch that the brief call was made “to discuss current developments in Iraq’s constitutional process”.

“This is an Iraqi process, but the United States is doing everything it can to assist them in meeting their own obligations and deadlines under the Transitional Administrative Law,” he said. Following the call, Shia negotiators in Baghdad said Friday they had presented a final compromise offer to Sunni leaders to break the impasse, after parliament on Thursday missed its own latest deadline for a deal. Negotiations were continuing through the night in Baghdad.

Al-Hakim, you may remember, is a top Shiite politician and head of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution, along with its affiliated militia the Badr Brigade. He was also the first major politician to call for Shiite autonomy in the south. After President Bush’s call, and recent events in Iraq itself, have forced the issue to further compromise.

The biggest myth being perpetrated at the moment is that this is solely a Sunni versus everyone else (especially Shiites) issue; that the Sunnis are just trying to blow the whole thing by making impossible demands. This is terribly false and misrepresentative of the situation. Moqtada al-Sadr, who is a Shiite, coming out against federalism (and therefore his co-religionists), clashes between his group and the religious Shiite Badr militia, the threatened resignation of 23 of his followers from the assembly and ministries, and the large protests staged in about eight cities should shatter the myth completely.

What this means is not simply that Sunnis are against the way federalism is being done, but that many others outside of the Kurdish and proposed southern autonomy regions, including Shiites, are against it as well. In it’s current manifestation, federalism gives the Kurds and the south, and this is the main beef, way too much autonomy.

There are two main issues regarding this. For one, the Iraqi government isn’t allowed to deploy the army to the region without express permission from the regional parliament. The ability to develop more efficient administration of resources and development isn’t the problem, it’s the local militias affiliated with political parties in parliament that want to keep power by suppressing freedom and intimidating people. This happens to a large degree in the south, in places like Basra, where the religious Shiite and Iran-affiliated Badr militia has been known to harass people for doing things “unIslamic.” It is a bad precedent to set, and one that can lead to an all out struggle for the country’s unity should the south ironically decide to secede due to its personal consolidation of power.

The other problem is the distribution of resources, which is another reason why many people of different ethnic and sectarian backgrounds oppose the current federalism. It isn’t about being Sunni or Shiite, it’s about being stuck in the middle of the country with few resources for development. Currently, the federal government takes a percentage of all exploited resources, but all undeveloped resources will remain the sole propriety of the regions. This is coupled with the previous concerns that the federal government won’t be able to stop the resource-rich north and south from seceding, leaving them high and dry.

If a re-run election were to be held in the case of the national assembly being dissolved, Sunnis would get a much greater representation in parliament and the religious Shiite parties would likely take a big hit now that people know more about the various political agendas. It would allow better representation to hammer out a better way to do federalism for the whole country. The problem with this is that a political vacuum would occur in Iraq, and even moreso in the United States. The reason the negotiations have to go through now as well as possible is because politics in Iraq are inexorably tied to politics in America, where people are desperate to see some real signs of progress in our mission of liberation.

Therefore, new elections for re-drafting the constitution can’t be held now, because if the people of America perceive this as a huge failure, the entire thing could fold. This is why President Bush intervened, so as to work everything out definitely. Because of the talk with Al-Hakim, a couple of concessions have been made regarding federalism and former Baath officials.

Following Bush’s call, Shiite officials submitted compromise proposals to the Sunnis, agreeing to delay decisions on federalism and the status of members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath party until a new parliament is elected in December.

Late Friday, the Shiites said a “consensus” had been reached and the revised draft was ready to be submitted to parliament.

Sheik Humam Hammoudi, a Shiite and chairman of the constitutional committee, said the draft would be submitted over the weekend and 5 million copies distributed nationwide ahead of the Oct. 15 referendum.

The compromise will put the decision off until the next parliament is elected, which is basically the same thing as having a re-run election without all the time lost (I argued for this solution when the draft was first delayed). It would also let the issue of allowing former Baath officials, of which many are Sunnis, to be put off until then, which should relieve even more tension.

This is a very good compromise, and the ones against the current federalism would do well to take it. If they do, they will gain many more seats and much more negotiating power in the next election should they choose to participate in full force. They have a huge stake in the future of Iraq, and it is difficult to take such a leap of faith, but they will have a much more powerful voice to shape the way they want federalism to work should they do so.

Of course, the Sunni negotiators are flaming mad just like usual, but hopefully this one will cut right over there heads and relieve the fears about the future in so many hearts. A vast majority of people want federalism, but it has currently been created in a way that will make the federal government impotent to the regional governments and politically-aligned militias. This is why the unity of the country is in danger. But given the generous nature and the rewards to be gained by Sunni and Shiite citizens living between regions, the message may go past the rabid negotiators and straight to the voters. It is they, in the end, who will approve or reject this potential future.