Consider carefully ideas of Iraq Study Group

A convergence of events this week paints a clear but bleak picture of America's ongoing role in the war in Iraq. At the same time, these events stand as a potential turning point toward consensus building and constructive change.
First, the long-awaited findings of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, released Wednesday, confirmed and legitimized what many Americans already knew. The panel minced no words: "Despite a massive effort, stability in Iraq remains elusive, and the situation is deteriorating. The ability of the United States to shape outcomes is diminishing. Time is running out."
As if to validate that conclusion, at the same time the report was being released Wednesday came word of one of the highest single-day death tolls for U.S. troops in Iraq.
Then, later that same day, the U.S. Senate confirmed by a 95-2 vote of confidence the nomination of Robert Gates to replace Donald Rumsfeld as secretary of defense. Gates provided a prologue to the study group's findings a day earlier when he told members of the Senate Armed Services Committee that America's current policy in Iraq is not working and that the United States is not winning the war.
Directions for Bush, Congress
It is now up to the Bush administration and members of Congress to consider seriously the ideas of the study group, to give the new secretary of defense the freedom to explore new options and to work cooperatively toward extricating the United States from its increasingly misguided mission in Iraq, a mission in which nearly 3,000 of our troops have been killed and some 22,000 others wounded over the past 45 months.
Above all else, all players must resist more of the same politicization and polarization that have blocked progress for too long. To that end, the Iraq Study Group serves as a fine example. Working together for eight months, the team of five prominent Democrats and five prominent Republicans was able to get along, construct a plan and unite behind it. As study group chairmen James A. Baker III and Lee H. Hamilton repeatedly noted, the country desperately needs to build a broad bipartisan consensus on the war.
Toward building consensus
Let the central findings of the 96-page report serve as a launching pad for such consensus. The study group proposes a short-term increase in troops devoted to training and equipping Iraqi security forces with the goal of withdrawing the bulk of U.S. combat troops by early 2008. It also seeks a renewed diplomatic offensive including involvement by two of Iraq's contentious neighbors: Syria and Iran.Not all of the recommendations will be universally popular. The Bush administration remains firmly opposed to engaging Syria and Iran in any peace talks. Some Democrats cling to the notion that a firm timetable for complete U.S. withdrawal is needed. But just as Democrats and Republicans were able to come together in the study group to craft a credible list of ideas, we'd like to think the executive branch and both parties in the legislative branch of government can do likewise.
To his credit, Bush's initial reaction to the study group's findings is encouraging: "This report will give us all an opportunity to find common ground, for the good of the country -- not for the good of the Republican Party or the Democratic Party, but for the good of the country." Bush, too, must end his grandstanding for his same failed policies and instead work seriously with others to craft new and potentially more effective strategies. That won't be easy or quick, but the study group's report stands out as a viable starting point.
The U.S. has been stuck in the muck of Iraq for too long. All players in this critical public policy issue must commit themselves to demonstrate the will to cooperate and the drive to succeed. The lives of countless more American soldiers hang in the balance.