THE news from Iraq this month has been uniformly bad. With American casualty figures for October climbing inexorably towards 100, the spike in violence has been linked with three factors: the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, the failed American security drive in Baghdad and the US midterm elections.

The steady flow of body bags and polls predicting Republican meltdown in the November 7 elections have produced a marked change in tone from the American President. Talk of "staying the course"has given way to references to "stabilising the situation" and "phased withdrawal".

If the former is a pre-requisite for the latter, no Allied troops will be leaving any time soon, despite assurances this week from the senior US general, George Casey, that the build-up of Iraq's security forces was "75per cent complete". On Thursday, there were five more American deaths in a Sunni area west of Baghdad. On the same day, US troops had to be diverted from anothermission after Sunni insurgents ambushed a police unit in Baqouba, north-east of Baghdad.

Earlier this month, British troops came close to having to re-enter the southern town of Amara after the eruption of fighting between rival Shia militias. In parts of the country the military functions as a front for death squads. Even in the relatively peaceful north, ethnic tension between Kurds and Arabs bubbles beneath the surface, especially in Kirkuk. To make a decisive impact on the upward spiral of violence would require more allied troops on the ground. Instead, there is mounting public pressure in both Britain and the US to "bring our boys home". Unlike many of the publications now calling for the allies to cut and run, The Herald always opposed this illegal and unthought-out war. Sad to say, deprived of security or basic amenities, many Iraqis believe they were better off under Saddam.

Who are we to contradict them? Ramadan is over now and soon the US elections will be behind us, two of the factors behind the current surge of violence against American forces. An Iraqi government deal on the division of oil revenues might take some of the heat out of the sectarian conflict. Meanwhile, troops should stay.

Though some argue that the security situation would improve if allied troops left, the opposite could be the case. In some areas the guys in Humvees are all that stop the militias and their reign of terror taking over altogether, and the allied presence at least prevents Iraq's truculent neighbours from joining the fray.

There has been much talk of Iraq becoming the newVietnam. That may be the American perspective. Instead, we should be trying to consider the conflict through the eyes of the Iraqis, who did not ask for this war. They have an altogether different fear. They believe Iraq could become the new Rwanda.