The victories in Iraq these days are small but deserve attention. The latest positive development was an edict this week from radical Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr ordering his fighters to put down their arms and go home. Mr. al-Sadr says he intends to enter mainstream politics. This likely isn’t the democracy American officials had in mind when they invaded the country more than a year ago, but may be a sign that the interim government that takes over the country in less than two weeks is seen as having legitimacy.

Also earlier this week, aides to Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the country’s most powerful Shiite cleric, met with Kurdish leaders to discuss a provision in the transitional administrative law that gives the Kurds veto power over a permanent constitution. Although the Shiites continue to object to the provision and the Kurds say they will not participate in the new government if it is removed, at least the parties are working together to seek a resolution.

Despite these developments, the violence continues in Iraq. The day after Mr. al-Sadr’s decree, the deadliest attack in months killed at least 30 people, none of them American or Iraqi soldiers, in Baghdad. And, Iraqis continue to blame the United States for the continued attacks. A poll conducted by the Coalition Provisional Authority found that most Iraqis thought they would be safer without U.S. forces in their country. Only 2 percent of Iraqis called the U.S. forces “liberators.”

These are all-important sentiments for U.S. officials as they slowly transfer control of Iraq to the country’s people. The security issues will likely remain a concern for a long time, but it is clear that decreasing the American presence while giving Iraqis more control over their future, whether political, economic or social, will decrease the likelihood that militias will be formed and supported. The issue is one of alternatives. If those who now feel powerless to change their future have an opportunity to participate in shaping Iraq through participation in its government, policing its streets or rebuilding its infrastructure, they will be less likely to bomb an Army convoy or a mosque as a symptom of their frustration.

Along these lines, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman offers a pointed assessment of this calculus in the broader Arab world. Having recently visited India and China, Mr. Friedman observed that the young people in these countries – often a source of maids for the Arab elite – were excelling at math, science and engineering, leaving Arab (and American) kids behind. He concluded that Arabs must be made to see that their countries’ policies and practices are holding back their children, especially the girls, while the children of their help are ascending.

Rather than being angry that their once great civilization is being left behind, these smart, rich Arabs should be enlisted to return it to greatness. This can be done only by educating their children in broad intellectual pursuits, not by indoctrinating them to blow up citizens and symbols of other civilizations.