[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]
But it would primarily require an intense diplomatic effort, to prepare and conduct parallel negotiations with several parties inside Iraq and out. All have much to lose or gain depending on exactly how the U.S. withdrawal is carried out, and this would give Washington a great deal of leverage that could be used to advance U.S. interests.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just so vague. The issue is whether the country will stick together. The US will never withdraw so long as they think there is a reasonable possibility of the country fracturing and the Sunni territories becoming independent entities in which Al-Qaeda-affiliated groups might train and operate freely (I know, it's already almost like that anyway...). The problem is that the Shias and, especially, the Kurds are not necessary opposed to dividing the country, since they would be left with the oil. The Iranians might not be opposed either, since it would be relatively easy to draw a smaller Shia Iraq into their sphere of influence.

So exactly what are you going to do diplomatically to prevent this outcome?

[ QUOTE ]
A strategy of disengagement would require bold, risk-taking statecraft of a high order, and much diplomatic competence in its execution.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the other problem, of course. Even if this kind of diplomatic maneuvering was possible, which I am skeptical about, the Bush administration has never offered any evidence that it is remotely capable of diplomatic competence.