The US-supported Maliki government seems unhappy with American efforts to reinforce their presence in Iraq, rather than making preparations to quit the country. This unhappiness may appear senseless, because when the US overthrew the Saddam regime and installed the current government, the latter seemed quite comfortable with the American presence. Maybe the US has become bothersome because things have been going relatively well for some time. However, it's also possible to analyze the situation from a different angle.

Two variables exist regarding the establishment of long-term stability in Iraq. First, a government based on a balance between diverging ethnic and religious groups is needed in order to prevent Iraq from becoming a "new Lebanon." Nevertheless, these different groups' expectations about Iraq's future and their ideas of sharing the country's economic resources are discordant. This lack of harmony becomes apparent in Iraq's internal struggles and also in these groups' choices of whether or not to support the US. There are also many people who believe that the US presence is delaying the promotion of an independent Iraq and obstructs the development of an Iraqi identity. Many others are convinced that the US' policies are nothing less than expansionism based on anti-Arab and anti-Islamic sentiment. In brief, the Maliki government has to deal with the US presence, on the one hand, and with anti-US movements, on the other. Washington has recently announced that, for strategic reasons, American forces will not leave the country as soon as was expected. This declaration made things more complicated for the Iraqi government. It's obvious that Iraq's stability depends on the satisfaction of different sectors of Iraqi society and that the attitude of the US damages stabilization efforts.

The second variable regarding Iraq's stability is its neighbors. There is no immediate crisis on the horizon with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, Syria or even with Turkey. As a matter of fact, there are constant efforts for improving bilateral relations with these countries. Relations with Iran, however, are quite troublesome. Iraq has to ameliorate its relations with its eastern neighbor but, at the same time, it has to pursue a pro-American policy. If it's true that relations with Iran are crucial for Iraq's domestic stability, it's also true that these relations are subordinated to US-Iran relations. If Iraq decides to have a totally friendly relationship with Iran, it will be pressured by the international community -- especially by the US. But if it adopts a hostile stance, then Iraq's stabilization will have to wait. Besides, the last thing Iraq needs is to have to engage in an armed conflict against Iran in the event of an American intervention. That's why, when the US declares that it has no intention of leaving Iraq or dismantling its military bases, the Iraqi government finds itself in a very difficult position.

We must also see the other side of the coin. It's not known what kind of domestic struggles will begin once the US troops leave Iraq. Besides, no one can predict which countries will benefit from the power vacuum caused by a US retreat. There will be consequences that no one can predict, whether the US leaves or stays. That's why the actual problems are not temporary, and they will also exist between future US administrations and future Iraqi governments.

TODAYSZAMAN