( CNN ) -- Iraq is suddenly back at the top of the news . The drawdown of `` combat '' troops has been completed , the handover to the State Department looks shaky , violence is ticking up and there is still no new Iraqi government , more than five months after the March elections . All these are real , but they are only the most immediate manifestations of deeper and longer term issues that the United States will need to manage . Our diplomats face big challenges . Let 's start with the Iraqi government . Superficially , it looks as if former prime minister Ayad Allawi and present prime minister Nouri al-Maliki -- who came in first and second in the elections -- are in a huge personality clash . Why ca n't one of them be a statesman and step aside ? The answer is that both they and other Iraqi politicians are worried about whether this will be their last opportunity to gain power . The American troops have de facto guaranteed for the past seven years that some sort of broad , representative democracy would continue in Iraq . But if the troops all leave by the end of 2011 , as currently agreed , who will guarantee the political system ? Who will prevent a drift back to autocracy , or even a coup ? The transfer of lead responsibility from American troops to diplomats has done little so far to answer these questions . This is a big diplomatic challenge : to find ways to convince politicians in a country that has known little other than violent political change that their next political choice will be made at the ballot box . This is an even bigger challenge in Iraq than elsewhere because of sensitivities about national sovereignty . Bosnians and Kosovars ( not to mention Haitians and many others ) have welcomed both foreign troops and civilians deployed to their territory to maintain their newly minted democracies . Iraqis , while complaining that the foreign troops have made a mess and failed to clean it up , wanted the Americans out . The State Department needs to focus on finding ways to guarantee whatever solution the Iraqis work out . Should it be `` term limits '' for al-Maliki , as outgoing Ambassador Chris Hill has suggested ? A political pact that would allow al-Maliki to remain for two years and then be replaced by Allawi ? An agreed reduction in the prime minister 's powers , particularly his control over the armed forces ? Someone outside the Iraqi political context is going to have to seal the deal with a commitment to make sure it is implemented . The most obvious vehicle for this is a new U.N. Security Council resolution , but getting one is complicated by the fact that Iraq wants an existing Security Council resolution lifted . Sounds like a classic diplomatic challenge . Another option is the Strategic Framework Agreement , a bilateral commitment to continued U.S. cooperation with Iraq that the Iraqis sought and continue to think important . Fully implemented , it would be little short of an alliance relationship with Iraq , one that would encourage foreign investment and open up economic , educational and cultural opportunities for Iraqis . Washington needs to convince the Iraqis that full implementation of the agreement depends on the continued existence of a broad-based democratic regime in Baghdad . That also sounds like a classic diplomatic challenge . So , too , does another underlying issue : the Kurdish/Arab dispute along a lengthy confrontation line in northern Iraq , where the Kurdistan Regional Government and its Peshmerga military forces claim territory that lies beyond the territory Iraqi Kurdistan controlled during the Saddam Hussein period . U.S. military forces have been proactive in building confidence between the Peshmerga and the Iraqi Army and ensuring that they do not come to blows . Who will take on this role once the U.S. forces withdraw ? The diplomats face many other challenges : They are going to be responsible for training the Iraqi police , they are going to have to protect themselves as they move about the country , they need to do much more to get European and other friends and allies engaged in Iraq , they need to help Iraq regain its regional role and settle its relations with the neighbors . Some in Congress are asking , why do the State Department and USAID need $ 9 billion for Iraq next year ? The better question is this : How much should we spend to protect an investment of over $ 700 billion that we have made over the past seven years ? The war is over , sort of , but the peace-building will go on for a long time . Peace-building is expensive , but a lot cheaper than war . The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Daniel Serwer .
As Iraq combat troops leave U.S. , diplomats face challenge of building peace , says Framework Agreement . He says U.S. needs to guarantee the solution Kurdish develop to their political impasse . He says spending on diplomacy protects over $ 700 billion investment U.S. has made in new regime .