Anthony H. Cordesman, a military expert and consistent critic of the Bush administration's strategy in Iraq, released a report yesterday calling for "strategic patience" in the nation's approach to the war, describing the U.S. military's modest security gains amid dire assessments of the lack of political progress in Iraq.

In his 25-page analysis — titled "The Tenuous Case for Strategic Patience in Iraq" — Cordesman wrote that the United States "does not have good options in Iraq and cannot dictate its future, only influence it," and that it is up to the Iraqi government to make strides toward stability. A precipitous withdrawal of U.S. troops probably would not help matters, he wrote, but if the Iraqis make progress, then Congress and the U.S. military need to work toward gradual troop reductions that reflect realities on the ground.

"The real case for strategic patience . . . is not the high probability of success in most areas, but the reasonable prospect of success in some areas," wrote Cordesman, a scholar with the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. He added that key elements of the president's troop increase strategy, however, "remain discouraging."

[...]

"While all the half truths and spin of the past have built up a valid distrust of virtually anything the Administration says about Iraq, real military progress is taking place and the U.S. team in Baghdad is actively seeking matching political and economic progress," Cordesman wrote, pointing to statistics that show that violence in several parts of the country has dropped recently. "What is critical to understand, however, is that while the surge strategy has had value in some areas, much of this progress has not [been] the function of the surge strategy, U.S. planning, or action by the Maliki government."