Common ground in Iraq

Dallas Morning News: While U.S. politicians continue to bicker over how long American troops should remain in Iraq, an intriguing and modestly encouraging signal comes from Iraq itself.
Iraq's key political factions last week put aside their differences long enough to call for a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. and coalition forces. While mostly symbolic and for Arab consumption, the joint statement of Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni leaders is seen as a public olive branch from some Shiite leaders to Sunni Arabs in advance of next month's parliamentary elections.
This is encouraging. For a new Iraq to survive, Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni factions must unite around common precepts of political self-determination. The joint statement condemned terrorism and broadly acknowledged a general right of insurgents to resist foreign occupation.
By American standards, this isn't a perfect accord. Nonetheless, it is a wisely measured attempt to walk a political tightrope in a nation known for factional disputes dissolving into violence.
Security realities
The United States remains committed to staying as long as it takes to help achieve security and stability. But the Bush administration also has hinted that some U.S. troops could leave Iraq next year, and Pentagon officials last week said it might withdraw some troops after the December elections. Troop withdrawal has to be orderly and in coordination with the political and security realities on the ground.
Just last week, gunmen wearing Iraqi army uniforms killed a Sunni Arab sheik, three of his sons and a son-in-law in an apparent effort to discourage Sunnis from participating in the December elections.
Violence as an alternative to participation in the political process remains one of the great threats to Iraq's internal security and political future.