"In at least some cases - and Burma is one - seeking trust, integration, and unity in the abstract may be neither useful nor even possible. Instead, a reconciliation process should seek, quite specifically, to find constitutional common ground well before drafting begins; it should be oriented toward developing a shared constitutional vision that will provide the warring sides with reason to commit to the new proposed regime. As the contending sides come to realize that they might share specific and concrete constitutional desires, they also come to realize that cohabitation might be possible. The moral of the story is that constitution making (broadly defined) is part and parcel of the creation of social integrity and not merely its consequence...Part I offers an overview of the constitutional history of Burma to the year 2000. Part II explains the constitutional processes going on today-not only the military government?s "roadmap to democracy" but also the democracy movement?s alternative process (or processes, depending on your perspective). As will become plain, the two processes are very different: the junta?s roadmap has yielded a written constitution that will shortly become the law of the land but which lacks all legitimacy.6 By contrast, the democracy movement?s alternative will not become sovereign law anytime soon, but it has set in train social dynamics that might, in the long run, build the conditions necessary for genuine constitutional rule..."