Iraqis have approved a landmark constitution but analysts say that Iraqi and US authorities must move beyond symbols and nail down ways of curbing the insurgency.
The constitutional referendum on October 15 "led to a split instead of a union," political science Professor Hasan Bazaz said Tuesday in Baghdad.
Joost Hilterman of the International Crisis Group called the new Iraqi charter "a sectarian constitution that will contribute to the country's slide into civil war rather than reverse it."
"The United States has made a half-hearted attempt to bring Sunni Arabs back into the process", he told AFP.
"What the US should do now is to make a last-ditch effort to bring the leaders of Iraq's three principal communities together and broker a political compromise that addresses the Sunni Arab's red line concerns and does not cross the Kurds' or Shiites' red lines."
The key points of contention are national unity, the balance of power between future Iraqi regions and the central government, and the extent to which Arab culture forms a basis for the Iraqi state.
UN envoy Ashraf Qazi hailed the new charter but warned in a statement: "The results of the referendum have indicated the degree of political polarization in Iraq."
While the nationwide majority in favor of the constitution was 78 percent, a large majority of Iraq's 18 provinces produced results for or against it of 95 percent or more.
"This poses an ongoing challenge for all Iraqis and underscores the importance of an inclusive national dialogue," Qazi acknowledged.
European Union external relations commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner said: "We must now focus on the way ahead."
Most observers, including US generals, agree the insurgency cannot be won by military means alone, but must be defeated with political, economic, and social programs too.
"You have to be advancing on all these fronts," said Charles Heyman, a senior defense analyst at Jane's Information Group.
He predicted Washington and the insurgents would reach "a messy political compromise where both sides walk away and say they have won.
"They are always talking to each other and they always deny it," Heyman said.
"It's simple. When it's quiet they are talking to each other. When there's a spike in attacks, the talks have broken down."
Hiltermann agreed that hammering out a political deal was the only way forward.
"But I doubt whether the Bush administration has the political will to bring it about. It could have already done so," he said, "or at least it could have made a serious attempt."
But Bush may be shoved into seeking a solution, since for the first time, a majority of Americans believe the Iraq war was the "wrong thing to do", according to a poll published Tuesday in The Wall Street Journal.
The survey came as the number of US deaths in Iraq reached the 2,000 mark, a symbolic figure that is nonetheless far below the 26,000-30,000 Iraqi civilians estimated to have died since US-led forces invaded in March 2003.
"If US and coalition forces carry on like this, it is possible that by this time next year there will be another 1,000 dead," Heyman warned.
In a violent south Baghdad neighborhood, US Sergeant First Class Joseph Barker admitted the fight against "A-team" insurgents was tough.
"We're struggling to keep up with them," he told an AFP photographer.
"For every advance we make, they make another one."
John Chipman of the International Institute for Strategic Studies said Tuesday that talks "are the best possible way to limit and eventually end the insurgency".