The Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan congressionally chartered study panel, gave a somber and… The Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan congressionally chartered study panel, gave a somber and blunt assessment of the United States’ involvement in Iraq yesterday.

The panel’s recommendations came after a string of similar sobering assessments on the war from conservative leaders, including outgoing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his newly approved replacement, Robert Gates.

While varying on different points, all of these assessments agree that we are not winning the war in Iraq, and we need a change of strategy that will effectively turn over control to the Iraqi government.

The study panel specifically called the situation “grave and deteriorating,” and warned that the “ability of the United States to influence events within Iraq is diminishing,” according to the Associated Press.

The panel even proposed a suggested troop withdrawal time frame, calling for an urgent diplomatic attempt to stabilize the country that would allow for most of the troops to be withdrawn by early 2008.

Although the panel’s assessments of the war are somber and optimistic, at best, it is refreshing to know that our government is beginning to have honest conversations about the War in Iraq, especially when just as recently as October, President Bush was claiming that we were “absolutely” winning the war.

The situation, in fact, is far from an absolute victory, with many declaring a civil war between Sunni insurgency and Shiite militias.

We have a long road ahead of us in Iraq, and it is important that we change our priorities. The situation, which began as a fight against terrorism nearly four years ago, has now surpassed the duration of American involvement in World War II, and, in all likelihood, will continue until at least the recommended withdrawal date of 2008.

The discussions about the war today are much different than they were four years ago. Now, discussions shouldn’t be about how we can win the war, but how we can effectively and efficiently install independence in the Iraqi government. We also might need to make the difficult decision, if it is necessary, to reduce political and military aid if the Iraqi government cannot make progress in establishing its own security.

The panel also recommended using diplomatic efforts to help to achieve stability in Iraq, singling out both Iran and Syria as potential allies for the fledgling Iraqi government.

Although we have had problems with Iran and Syria in the past, using diplomacy to create a more stable environment for Iraq should take priority over U.S. interests.

Unfortunately, the panel’s recommendations on Iraq are just that, and the president is under no obligation to follow its suggestions. And, while Bush has not stated whether he will follow the recommendations, he has at least committed to working with both parties to reform a strategy that he has reluctantly admitted is not going well.

The Bush administration has taken the first step on the road to recovery in Iraq: admitting that there is a serious problem. Now, it needs to implement a plan that will solve it.