How about handing over things in Iraq to "Muslim forces" as a transitional step (as Italians seem to be suggesting)?
===========
Yes, this seems like a good idea to me though I must admit my opinion is built upon two ideas/assumptions which are, at this point, impossible to verify:
(a.) that a replacement of mostly American troops with soldiers from Islamic countries would be accepted by active resisters and their supporters as a positive step (a key consideration, since the now obviously well organized and nationally disbursed religious and political insurgencies have the power to disrupt events anywhere in the country)
(b.) important practical matters are worked out such as who's paying for the deployment, what the rules of engagement will be if resistance continues (that is, would American bombing sorties to "root out terrorists" merely be replaced by Saudi and Syrian ones or would a more measured approach be adopted?) and a commonly agreed upon date and condition for complete withdrawal and the full restoration of Iraqi sovereignty.
If Islamic troops are no better at performing "peacekeeping" in Iraq than Americans and indiscriminate force is used resistance will continue - only this time the Americans and Europeans will be out of harms' way.
If questions of funding, combat rules, and withdrawal are not settled the Islamic countries will have little incentive to dive in.
There is another problem...
The total replacement of American forces with Arab troops will deprive Washington of its chief tool for influencing events - force.
Even if the logistical and diplomatic problems could be resolved and a multinational Arab peacekeeping force created and deployed, I suspect Washington will balk because the loss of (perceived or sought) control will be clearly understood.
There is another way to state this...
Washington will not want to give up its approximately 14 bases. This means that American troops will stay in Iraq. Would these troops refrain from responding to inevitable attacks, deferring to the Arab peace keepers? Would there be peaceful coexistence between the two armed groups?
It's easy to imagine a bewildering combination of bad scenarios.
So, Italian Foreign Minister Frattini's suggestion seems very sensible but faces such an extraordinarily high hurdle to move from idea to act that I believe it won't go beyond the chatting stage.
Again, I do not believe (though I admit I may be wrong - it'll surprise no one to know I'm not privy to ruling class meetings) that Washington - whether Bush or Kerry led - will be willing to give up its newly acquired Iraqi garrison so easily.
This refusal complicates and hinders all efforts to improve the Iraqi's situation.
.d.