That depends what the Latin tradition is. Obviously, there is Latin tradition that pre-dates filioque, when the Latin Church was Patristic, and pre-Frankish. But I agree that it is wisely prefaced.
The basis upon which this is to be resolved is to stop short of proclaiming the dual procession as dogma and rather recognize it as a Latin tradition, backtracking a bit from the Florence
I guess it's going to be a horse-trade one way or another, the way the Church agreed to trade the Book of Hebrews for the Revelation.
The Church was theologically united when it canonized the Bible, met in first Ecumenical Councils and served Patristic liturgies. If the Latin Church wants to return to her Latin patristic roots, I don't see much in the way of a reunion by default.
It's not anything that the Latin Church did not profess or teach together with the Greek side. No morphing or lording is necessary. You can always appeal to tradition, wisely. Though, someone has to reset what the starting point is.
Brother:
It seems to me that Charlemagne and the Franks seem to be the main cause of this whole mess. He wanted to tweak the Emperor of the East, so he pushed the Filioque and Leo IX until he got what he wanted. The Pope was more or less a puppet at the time by my reckoning.