The vote by Iraqis on a constitution last weekend will be dissected dozens of ways over the coming weeks, but the most important outcome was that a vote was held, the outcome beforehand was unknown and the give and take of democracy played out in various ways. The constitution appears that it will pass, with more Sunnis than expected supporting it, but the Bush administration correctly points out that the vote is only one more step in a long process.

One of the most important last-minute changes to the proposed constitution was to allow it to be amended in the next year, rather than eight years as originally planned. That change, at the urging of Washington, was to provide the Sunnis hope that unfavorable elements could soon be amended. It could, of course, work in the opposite direction as well, further marginalizing a minority group. But the change seemed to have been enough to prompt a major Sunni political party to support the constitution.

In a story reported Saturday in The Washington Post, voter turnout in the Sunni city of Fallujah was 93 percent, a rate attributed to the lack of attacks. In the city of Ramadi, however, despite the presence of U.S. Marines patrolling the streets, multiple explosions kept the turnout to only 10 percent. Question: Who controlled the vote, the Iraqi government or the terrorists in Iraq?

The Bush administration understood this, and unlike January when its caution was drowned out by exultation over the election of a provisional government, this time it was more careful in its statements. As if to reinforce the challenges that lie ahead, the U.S. military reported Monday that its airstrikes Sunday around Ramadi killed 70 people – all terrorists, according to the military; many civilians too, according to a doctor at a nearby hospital.

Caution is needed too as Sunni Arabs experience being a minority power in Iraq as debates accumulate and the shape of the constitution as amended becomes clear. In a unicameral governing body, they might experience the kind of frustration a small state would if the United States had a House but no Senate. The Bush administration has tried, with some success, to lessen that problem, and seems to have gained a small amount of time with the constitutional vote to continue its efforts at building a more stable Iraq.

The constitution itself is quite long and full of unresolved interpretations. Article 2, for instance, guarantees, “No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established” and “No law that contradicts the principles of democracy may be established” while also granting the right of religious practice for all faiths. What these mean and how they might be in effect simultaneously is enough to keep Iraqi politicians arguing for years. If that is all they do, this weekend’s vote was a success.