The World

If the furore over the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran hadn’t intervened, the US delegation to the IISS security conference in Bahrain last weekend would have spent the time boasting about progress in Iraq. In 2006, the Americans sent a relatively low-level delegation to Bahrain. This time they were out in force. The delegation was led by Robert Gates, the defence secretary and included William Fallon, the admiral in charge of Centcom – which runs the US military presence in the Middle East. Also at the conference was Colonel HR McMaster – the American officer who pioneered the "clear and hold" tactics that became the model for the US "surge" in Iraq.

As it was, Gates did spend a fair amount of time talking about the progress that had been made in Iraq. But he was cautious about making sweeping claims that things have taken a decisive turn for the better. Everybody remembers the hubris of "mission accomplished". And the Americans are well aware of the fragility of security gains, without real political progress to back it up.

Still, it seems perverse to deny that things have improved. The Iraqi politicians who went to the Bahrain conference seemed more confident and assertive than in previous months. (Unlike most of their Gulf counterparts, they are usually engaging people to speak to.) Violence is down – dramatically so in Baghdad; refugees are returning. Plenty of reputable reporters – who are not shills for the American military – have come away impressed. There was a striking report from Baghdad on the BBC’s Newsnight programme last night.

But the Americans are right to be cautious. They know that they have benefited from developments that are well beyond their control – in particular, the decisions by Sunni tribes to turn on al-Qaeda and by Shia militias to cool it for a while. Both of these decisions could easily change.

Above all, we’re reaching a crucial moment. The "surge" is about to be wound down. This month, American troop levels will start falling again. The party line in Bahrain was that the security gains are solid enough for some troops to start packing up. Talking to me and some FT colleagues, Admiral Fallon said that – of course – there are some risks involved in winding down the surge, but "we need to get moving".

Behind the scenes, however, some of the Americans were considerably less sanguine about what is going on. They argue that it is a huge risk to start pulling troops out now, endangering the McMaster strategy of ensuring security for Iraqis in areas that have been pacified. The pace of withdrawals, it’s acknowledged, is being dictated by domestic American considerations – rather than the needs of Iraq. The regular army simply has no more troops to deploy without morale-busting extensions of tours of duty. And the alternative – to mobilise more regiments of the National Guard – is a political non-starter.

So let’s hope that President Bush and John McCain are wrong when they say that it’s the surge that has made all the difference in Iraq. Because if that’s true, things may soon take a turn for the worse again.