Iraq: Still Worth Some Waiting

DIWANIYAH, Iraq -- When the Bush administration talks about the progress it is making in Iraq, it points to places like this provincial capital about 100 miles south of Baghdad. The population is overwhelmingly Shiite, and the region is fairly calm by comparison with the capital. But even here in Qadisiyah province, the transition to full Iraqi sovereignty is taking longer than it should.

The Iraqi army was supposed to take control of Qadisiyah and neighboring Wasit province from coalition forces in September. But that timetable recently slipped to January or February because of worries that the Iraqis aren't fully ready. So Iraqi officials here continue to avoid making tough decisions about resources, and local insurgents keep lobbing mortar rounds into the compound where Polish and other coalition troops are working with the United States to maintain order.

When provinces meet the schedule, they should be rewarded with more economic assistance. When they miss their deadlines, they should get fewer resources. For most of the country, that transfer should be possible within six to 12 months. In Baghdad and in Anbar province, it will take longer. But everyone should understand that America isn't prepared to keep writing a blank check.

An Iraq that's actually run by Iraqis again won't be perfect. In the early years, it will be corrupt and disorderly: The Baghdad airport probably won't work as efficiently when it's returned to Iraqi control; insurgents will probably still be setting off roadside bombs. If things go right, American troops will be welcome here training and advising Iraq's security forces even after the bulk of the U.S. forces have come home.

To make this transition plan work, Americans need a little more patience and Iraqis a little less. That's the judgment of Gen. John Abizaid, with whom I traveled in Iraq last week. "Our problem is to give up some control. The Iraqi problem is to take control," says Abizaid, who as head of Central Command has overall responsibility for U.S. forces here. He says Americans shouldn't think of the transition as a straight line -- "as they stand up, we stand down" -- but as a process of gradual stabilization.

The new Iraqi security forces, totaling 325,000, will mostly be in place by year's end, says Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey, who is responsible for training. Dempsey tells me that next year he hopes to consolidate this force, teaching the Iraqis mundane skills, such as logistics management, that make a modern army work. He quotes what was said of Gen. Ulysses S. Grant on the need for steady nerve in this process: "Now is the time for 2 in the morning courage." He says the timing of transition "is an art, not a science."

Abizaid's big worry is the battle between Sunnis and Shiites for control of the new Iraq. "Sectarian violence is the mortal danger," he says. "Left unchecked, it will lead to civil war. There are a lot of similarities that remind me of Beirut in the early stages before things got out of control."

In congressional testimony this month, Abizaid raised a red flag about the risk of civil war, but he told me Friday that he had new confidence that Iraqi leaders were prepared to make the tough decisions necessary to check sectarian strife. He found Prime Minster Nouri al-Maliki and his key ministers more confident and focused than they had been earlier this summer, when death squads seemed to have taken over Baghdad. To test the new security plan for the capital, Abizaid walked the streets of two of Baghdad's most violent neighborhoods on Thursday. "The chances of success are good, if we give ourselves time to succeed," says Abizaid.

I don't feel quite so optimistic, but I think Abizaid is right in urging a sensible, deliberate policy to reduce the American presence -- as opposed to a pell-mell rush for the exit. The situation in Iraq is difficult, but the sense of panic in the Washington debate just doesn't match the situation here. It's bad, but it's not hurtling out of control.

Americans should be worried about Iraq but not so much that they take rash actions that would end up hurting American interests in the Middle East at a delicate time. We'll be out of Iraq, one way or another, over the next few years. Rushing the process because of American impatience would make a bad situation even worse.

davidignatius@washpost.com