Thank You, Prime Minister al-Maliki!

In this week's episode of the classic boomer drama, "Leave it to Beaver", our hero's feeble attempts at long-distance ventriloquism fail. His agent, our brilliant ambassador Crocker, does not seem to have rehearsed the Iraqi premier's lines with him. Instead, he leaves al-Maliki to say what he wants regarding the visit of Prince Obama.

Miraculously, he tells the truth: Obama's plan is at least a plan, and it suits him well. 16-20 months is about enough time for the US combat forces to draw down, and starting that in January, 2009 seems propitious given recent developments.

There is no guarantee of success for Maliki and his government--in fact, he could be out when and if fair, fully-contested provincial elections occur (now scheduled, like the begin of the Obama Drawdown, for early 2009). These results, largely dependent on the extent of Sunni willingness to cooperate, are crucial: A result which is marred by violence or heavy boycotts could extend insurgency. In the hands of McCain it would mean four more years of occupation (or until when he kicks, whichever is sooner), and if Maliki doesn't like it, too bad for him.

I think we can count on Moqtada al-Sadr to keep the Shiites out of the streets and getting his people to vote under Obama's program, which will be most agreeable to him. Whether we can count on him after we are gone is wholly another question. So, that's another huge area of risk for Maliki: that the whole thing will "go pear-shaped" (Anglicism) after the Obama Drawdown.

Still, he is brave and expresses the Iraqi popular will to defend its long-neglected sovereignty--at least for this stage of his career. It will certainly be to his electoral advantage to build some space between himself and Bushite policy. His statement was well-crafted for this purpose, and, as such, deserves praise for both the content and the manner of putting it out there.

As for the Bushites, it's game over. They've actually got things on a good glide path for their approach onto the carrier this time: "Jan. 20, 2009: Mission (Impossible) Accomplished, Pt. 2".

The truth of the eventual form of any security agreement that the US is likely to make with Iraq (whether the administration is Bushite, Obamaian, or McCainian) becomes clear: the Iraqis will not consent to continue the UN mandate (under which American occupation became legitimized after the fact) further than (approx.) December, 2010. Any permanent US bases on Iraq are subject to future agreement, upon which there will be none. The future Iraqi government may be pro-American or anti-American, or both (for example, depending on our posture towards its sovereignty, which may be a partisan issue), or it could be tripartite and chaotic, but it will have this as its rock of continuing national policy for quite awhile.