Freedom of expression. Public control of decision-making processes. Power sharing. Fair and legitimate representation. Accountability of elected leaders. The theoretical tenets of a functioning democracy.
Lofty theoretical ideals that, when all the diverse voices of the multitude have expressed their opinions in democracy's cherished spirit of liberty and tolerance, must conclude in one procedural event in order that something, actually, gets done: compromise.
When we talk of "political progress" and the lack thereof in Iraq, we are talking of this: compromise. Compromise on institutional arrangements, on control of Iraq's natural resources, compromise on de-Baathification, compromises toward a ceasefire between warring militias, compromise...
If only some of the above were to occur, both Republicans and Democrats would shower praise on the Baghdad government. Yet now, as untested political alliances in Iraq can prove deadly, American politicians and presidential hopefuls launch childish retorts at each other across the aisle. When will Iraqi politicians finally achieve that lasting degree of political accommodation? How about when the American ones do. This will only happen when both parties agree to stop caring who gains credit in 2008 for Iraq's successes and who is blamed for its failures. When we can agree on a way forward in Iraq that seems at least somewhat sensible because, lets face it: no one has any idea what will really work...
Sigh. I'm not holding my breath.
ADDENDUM: Just got a chance to read the Economist's argument for why we shouldn't withdraw now.