Despite repeated avowals to the contrary, so far we seem to be getting the best possible short term solution: end of hostilities and negotiations in both Najaf and Fallujah, mediated in the former by Sistani forces, and conducted in the latter with local sunni notables.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/13/international/middleeast/13IRAQ.html
Having Sistani serve as a mediator between the US and Moqtada re-places him as the authority above us both, where any rational person should want him. And negotiations in Fallujah present the opportunity of calling forth legitimate spokesmen for the Anbar region which has long been a crying need.
In the best of all possible worlds, the ultimate mediated solution would be an immediate election for a large parliamentary government with lots of small parties (keeping any one from dominating) -- a government which it was clear from the outset would have the power to ask us to go.
Only such a government could ever be legitimate. And only in partnership with such a government could our staying ever work. And if it asked us to go -- if the majority agreed that their fear of each other and their desire for our money did not outweigh their desire to be free of us -- then we might as well at admit that even in the worst case scenario, we would be better off leaving now than five or ten years from now, when the worst case scenario would be worse. The longer we stay, the more we will be hated, which is the opposite of our aim (quite aside from the 50 billion a year it would cost). Leaving soon, and when requested, would do more to boost our political capital in the region than anything else we could do at this point; we would be the first to ever do so, and we would still have the credit for toppling Saddam. If disaster ensued, it could be at least partially blamed on the Iraqis rather than entirely on us. And while the aftermath ensued, the whole world, including us, would have a lot of time to watch and figure out a better way to accomplish these aims after this one had proven itself the wrong way.
On the other hand, if such a government asked us to stay, and granted us a SOFA, then it would be at least conceivable that we could win a counterguerrilla war. But without such a legitimate government, it's not conceivable, IMHO.
Oh, and one last ironic point: if there ever really were anything we could do to set off dominos of democracy in the region, this would be it.
Needless to say, the chances of such an outcome are absurdly slim. But this first tiny step is in the right direction -- and fwiw, it goes directly contrary to everything we said as recently as last week.
Michael "I'm an optimist because it's intellectually more challenging :o)"