Last week Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated, “we are committed to Iraq, we want to see a stable, sovereign, self-reliant Iraq.” But at what cost? At the cost of delaying the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq? The administration is not willing to go that far…yet.

Last month the Islamic State of Iraq, whom the Pentagon claims is linked to Al-Qaeda released plans for a fresh wave of attacks to take place in and around Baghdad. They titled this wave of attacks “Good Harvest,” and claimed the reason for the attacks was the tight bond formed between the Shiite lead Iraqi government and the United States government.

This promise was then fulfilled last week in the most deadly two day display of violence that Iraq has seen in over a year. On Thursday the targets of the attacks were crowds waiting for food aid in central Baghdad and inside a roadside restaurant filled with Iranian pilgrims. Both targets were known to be predominately Shiites, and 35 of the victims were Iranians.

Despite the announcement of this plan and then the carrying out of attacks that lead to the deaths of over 140 Iraqi civilians, most U.S. officials continue to insist they will stick to the June 30 deadline to move all forces outside major cities, including Baghdad. The top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. Raymond Odierno, is singing somewhat of a different tune after the recent attacks. He said that if the Iraqi government requests a US presence in the cities, such as Baghdad, past the June 30th deadline that the US would be happy to oblige.

The problem that the most recent attacks reveal is that Sunnis still do not feel as though they will have a substantial place at the table of the Iraqi government once the Americans have exited the scene. The desperation is apparent on the part of Sunni extremists to delay the solidification of a respected Shiite led government.

Al-Maliki’s government has repeated their promise to employ thousands of Sunni militiamen with police and military jobs. However, in the eyes of Sunni leadership, this promise has not come near the point of being fulfilled.

While bringing in the Sunnis would be the intelligent move on a ‘hearts and minds’ level for the Al-Maliki government, it would also make sense simply on a logistical level. As the Iraq security forces stand now, they are not in a position to withstand a determined uprising by the Sunni community of extremists and militias.

So what does this mean for the Obama administration’s plan to begin to withdrawal forces from major cities by June and all forces from the country by 2011? Well quite simply it means that those plans will be further delayed. The way this delay will be presented to the public is with the rhetoric already being used by Secretary of State Clinton. “We refuse to abandon the Iraqi people.”

Officials in Washington are already laying the groundwork for a change of policy on the withdrawal. It will not be announced in a dramatic fashion. Rather it will be a slow and incremental shift in policy. What the Obama administration would love is to delay the deadline for withdrawal out past the November 2012 election. If they find the excuses to sell an extension to the American people past November 2012 then they are home free to occupy until their heart is content. Then their main worry will become the Iraqi government. As long as violence erupts in Iraq frequently enough to keep Iraqi’s on edge, the sale of continued occupation will not be extremely difficult.