The issue has been making its way around the blogosphere, but Cole is one of the few who actually adds value by trying to describe the foreign/domestic interests.

My main concern is that any kind of phased withdrawal may increase the danger to US troops that are left behind. If, as he says, the US military is "keeping the lid on a volcano", is it possible that decreasing troop levels may blow the top off and result in higher US (and Iraqi) casualties? Obviously there would be political pressure against increasing troop levels, but what if that's the best way to stabilize the country (assuming stability is now the key performance measure).

Second, and this is in keeping with a "lowered expectations" trend, perhaps it's time to concede the fantasy goal of a purely secular government. While I am entirely against the idea of having a Supreme Council structure that vets/vetos all legislation, it might be more reasonable to expect a Western-style criminal code, with family law handled through shari'a courts for each sect/group. The US can apply indirect pressure to tweak divorce laws, etc. in the future. Better that religious debates are fought non-violently within a constitutional framework, rather than on the streets.

I'm also not sure how the US will be able to curtail militia activity "from afar". Militias right now are using all sorts of covers (e.g. Iraqi police uniforms), I don't imagine they will suddenly turn into formal armies and start marching around in battalions.

Do you think it's possible that Iran might be able to use its influence to stabilize the country (or at least the Shi'a)? Would they do so in return for diplomatic concessions from the US/Europe? I know it's ideologically unthinkable, but they do seem to have the resources and clout to ease tension in certain circles.

Honestly I don't see a really "clean" way out of this, for the US or the Iraqis. Just looks like a mad scramble for power without concern for the state's long-term viability. Devil's algebra.

I do note the utter lack of any mention of the British or any other coalition-of-the-willing forces in his "ten point plan".

Good article.

My main concern is that any kind of phased withdrawal may increase the danger to US troops that are left behind. If, as he says, the US military is "keeping the lid on a volcano", is it possible that decreasing troop levels may blow the top off and result in higher US (and Iraqi) casualties?

That's a good point. Cole is saying pull out the ground troops and stick to air support. This should reduce American casualties, since they'll no longer be the ones dealing with roadside bombs and other sticky situations. Of course, the Iraqi gov't forces will certainly take higher casualties, likely more than the US is taking now. Especially if the insurgents take a town or two due to the US pulling ground troops out and a major engagement is fought to retake it. Less American casualties makes it easier politically to carry on the effort, Cole is hoping, while still being able to support the Iraqi gov't in battle from the sky. It might also reduce anti-American sentiment among non-combatant Iraqis, and so lessen the insurgency's support.

Do you think it's possible that Iran might be able to use its influence to stabilize the country (or at least the Shi'a)? Would they do so in return for diplomatic concessions from the US/Europe? I know it's ideologically unthinkable, but they do seem to have the resources and clout to ease tension in certain circles.

There's an article in last week's Time magazine that talks about Iran, Inside Iran's Secret War for Iraq. It makes for interesting reading, if not really clarifying things. Politically, at best I think all Iran can do is help Shiite Iraqi groups feel more secure and therefore less inclined to wreak horrible vengeance on the Sunni Arabs. But such influence is a double-edged sword, and could inflame Sunni sentiment against Shiites, or lead to more fervent anti-Americanism among Shiites.

There's no clean way out, but maybe there's a way to keep up the pressure so Iraqis end up with an acceptable state at the end of it, as Cole suggests.