my strategy for Iraq

An alternative, sane option for the US in Iraq: It is to withdraw to the borders, Kurdistan or distant bases within Iraq and allow the war to sort itself out. Only then will real power-brokers emerge able to make a real deal; only then will the future of the deserts and cities of Iraq find a new political settlement.

The only thing preventing this from occurring is president Bush's pride and stupidity. But Iraq and America have each suffered both signature characteristics of George W. Bush for longer than either deserves. It's long past time to cut our losses and acknowledge reality.

Would this lead to a regional war? It's perfectly possible. But it could also lead to the powers of the region actually acting in rational ways to achieve a new and more stable balance of power.

The culture of dependency on U.S. security guarantees has not helped Muslim moderation or Middle East peace over the last two decades. Such dependency gave us al Qaeda and 9/11. Slowly weaning the Saudis and Egyptians off such dependency could be a healthy move.

Already, the Saudis, in the wake of U.S. withdrawal, are countering Iranian influence in the region with far more skill and sophistication than the Bush administration ever could. The U.S can still be a major player from the margins - just not the regional hegemon in the center.

This is the silver lining of Iraq's disintegration. It could help rearrange the region to a more stable balance of power. It could do so by a brutal regional war; or by a slow, intermittently violent process of terror, diplomacy and strategic positioning.

Either way, the less the U.S. is directly involved in one side or another, the more options we retain for the future. Is disengagement a defeat. But it is defeat in a war we have already lost. It could mean a gain in a war that is only just beginning. It could mean victory in the end, whatever victory at this point can be understood to mean.