An excellent, clearly argued editorial at the Wall Street Journal has the subheadline, “Zarqawi’s bombs hit their target in Washington:” The Iraq Panic.

“It’s like they’re just making it up as they go along. The reality is that we’re losing in Iraq.”—Senator Chuck Hagel (R., Neb.), June 27, 2005, U.S. News & World Report.

“And we are now in a seemingly intractable quagmire. Our troops are dying and there really is no end in sight.”—Senator Ted Kennedy (D., Mass.), June 23, 2005, Armed Services Committee hearing.

The polls show the American people are growing pessimistic about Iraq, and no wonder. They are being rallied against the cause by such statesmen as the two above. Six months after they repudiated the insurgency in a historic election, free Iraqis are continuing to make slow but steady political and military gains. Where the terrorists are gaining ground is in Washington, D.C.

This is despite tangible, albeit underreported, progress in Iraq. In the political arena, an Iraqi transition government has formed that includes representatives from all ethnic and religious groups. Leading Sunnis who boycotted January’s election are now participating both in the parliament and in drafting a new constitution. The Shiite uprising of a year ago has been defeated. The government now has three deadlines to meet: drafting a constitution by August, a referendum on that constitution in October and elections for a permanent government in December.

This political momentum vindicates the decision to hold the January election, despite warnings that it was “going to be ugly” (in Joe Biden’s phrase). Some of those who predicted the worst because the Sunnis refused to participate—Mr. Biden, the Hoover Institution’s Larry Diamond—are the same people who now say again that disaster looms. Clearly the smart strategy was to move ahead with the vote and show the Sunnis they had to participate if they wanted a role in building the new Iraq. So why should we believe these pessimists now?

As for security, the daily violence is terrible and dispiriting, but it is not a sign of an expanding insurgency. As U.S. and Iraqi military targets have hardened their defenses, the terrorists have turned to larger bombs delivered by suicidal jihadists aimed at softer targets. This drives up the casualty figures, especially against Iraqi civilians, but it does not win more political converts.

Insurgencies that have prevailed in history—Algeria, China, Cuba—have all had a large base of popular support. That more of the bombers seem to be coming from outside Iraq is cause for worry, since it means there will be a continuing supply of suicide bombers. But it also means that the insurgency is becoming an invasion force against Iraq itself, which means it lacks the native roots to sustain it.

Read it all.