For anyone still wondering whether Iraq had yet degenerated into a civil war, this week provided the answer: It’s worse than that. Hundreds of Iraqis dead in the last few days; 3,700 killed last month; and sectarian, insurgent and criminal violence spreading across Baghdad with the United States unable to stop it. President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki are expected to meet next week in Jordan to discuss improving security. They may be too late.

The retaliation for Thursday’s string of car bombs and subsequent mortars and missiles in Baghdad’s Shiite center, Sadr City, was as predictable as it was deadly. U.S. forces are there, according to news reports, fighting heroically, but ultimately will be blamed for the start of the violence, as anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has already begun to do. This is a no-win situation for the United States, and unless it can swiftly change the political conditions in Iraq, forcing troops to defend a crumbling strategy is tragic.

Muqtada al-Sadr emphasized the most apparent political change this week when he threatened to withdraw his support for the Iraqi government if the prime minister met with President Bush and the lack of security remained. The cleric’s army has done substantial harm to Iraq, and the fact that he is creating an impossible choice for Prime Minister al-Maliki suggests that a new government is not far off. The United States would do better if it began looking forward to that change rather than clinging to a government lacking authority.

More than that, the pre-emption of U.S. reforms could be seen in the weekend meeting between Iraq and Iran and in Iraq’s improved relations with Syria. The meeting demonstrates the point made for months in the United States that the two neighbors have an interest in stability in Iraq. But if this rapprochement produces improved levels of electricity, oil production and commerce, as it is designed, it will push U.S. influence even further to the sidelines.

Whatever Iran or Syria offer, the most basic question is: Who can provide security in Iraq? The rising violence and increasing number of deaths in the heart of Iraq suggest, for now, that the answer is not the United States. If the answer becomes Iraq’s neighbors, enmity toward a continued U.S. presence will rapidly escalate and the primary security question for the Bush administration will become getting American troops home safely.