Editorial: Iraqi stability in question after pullout

Iraq's future is in the hands of its own people, declared President Barack Obama as American troops formally pulled out of the country's cities. So ended six years of occupation and so begins a chapter in Iraqi history that, hopefully, will see wholesale reconstruction and the negotiation of an enduring power-sharing formula between Iraq's rival ethnic and religious groups. The chances of long-term stability remain subject to any number of caveats. Nonetheless, Iraq's future certainly appears brighter than, say, three years ago when, at the height of sectarian violence, the splitting of the country into separate Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish states seemed a real possibility.

How much of this is due to the United States finally enacting a sound strategy and how much to the Iraqis working out their own differences is a moot point. The Americans, having blundered into Baghdad in search of Saddam Hussein's illusory weapons of mass destruction, floundered until President George W. Bush ordered a surge in troop numbers. This was designed to give Prime Minister Nouri Maliki's Government breathing space to prepare the Iraqi people to govern themselves. Mr Maliki achieved that, but only in small part during a relative calm that persists to this day.

The decline in violence is undoubtedly also related to the Shiites' triumph over the Sunnis in the bitter civil war of 2006-07, as well as a reaction against the extremes of al Qaeda terrorists. The Sunnis were supreme in Iraq during Saddam's rule. The Shiite majority welcomed the Americans, correctly seeing the invasion as the opportunity to claim power for themselves. That has been accomplished both through conflict and as a consequence of the establishment of a broadly democratic system. The ongoing sporadic outbreaks of violence are probably the work of al Qaeda and designed to goad the Shiite-dominated security forces into reprisals against the Sunnis, thereby escalating unrest.

It is up to those Iraqi forces to step into the gap left by the US troops. There are many questions about their training and capability. About 130,000 American troops will be based outside urban areas until September and then steadily withdrawn from Iraq by August 2010 under a US-Iraqi status of forces agreement signed last November by President Bush. The US forces remain available to the Iraqi Government. Recent nationalist rhetoric by Mr Maliki suggests that would be a step of absolutely last resort. The White House, for its part, expects the Iraqis to step up, and has already shifted its focus to Afghanistan.

As the Americans withdraw, they should acknowledge that Iraq has proved another instance of their ambition surpassing their ability. They have remodelled the country's political and military landscape only after a fashion and at a considerable cost. A particular penalty has been the strengthening of Iran, which can thank the US for removing its most bitter regional rival, further devastating Iraq's already crippled economy in the process. Involvement in Iraq also distracted the US from more fundamental problems in the Middle East and the re-emergence of the Taleban in Afghanistan.

Street celebrations erupted in Baghdad to mark the American withdrawal. National Sovereignty Day was declared. The sense of euphoria will last only so long, however. A Government still finding its feet, riddled with corruption and boasting security forces of limited quality must set about rebuilding Iraq urgently and efficiently. Reconciliation must go hand in hand with reconstruction. Only if that occurs will the Iraqi people be able to put 30 years of Saddam's tyranny and American occupation behind them.