WASHINGTON -- After months of trying unsuccessfully to develop a
common message on the war in Iraq, Democratic Party leaders are
beginning to coalesce around a broad plan to begin a quick withdrawal
of US troops and install them elsewhere in the region, where they
could respond to emergencies in Iraq and help fight terrorism in other
countries.

The concept, dubbed ''strategic redeployment," is outlined in a slim,
nine-page report coauthored by a former Reagan administration
assistant Defense secretary, Lawrence J. Korb, in the fall. It sets a
goal of a phased troop withdrawal that would take nearly all US troops
out of Iraq by the end of 2007, although many Democrats disagree on
whether troop draw-downs should be tied to a timeline.

Howard Dean, Democratic National Committee chairman, has endorsed
Korb's paper and begun mentioning it in meetings with local Democratic
groups. In addition, the study's concepts have been touted by the
senator assigned to bring Democrats together on Iraq -- Jack Reed of
Rhode Island -- and the report has been circulated among all senators
by Senator Dianne Feinstein, an influential moderate Democrat from
California.

The party remains divided on some points, including how much detail to
include in a party-produced document, fearful of giving too much
fodder for attacks by Republicans.

But in its broad outlines, many leading Democrats say the Korb plan
represents an answer to Republicans' oft-repeated charge that
Democrats aren't offering a way forward on Iraq -- and to do so in a
way that is neither defeatist nor blindly loyal to the president.

''We're not going to cut and run -- that's just Republican
propaganda," Dean said in a speech Feb. 10 in Boston. ''But we are
going to redeploy our troops so they don't have targets on their
backs, and they're not breaking down doors and putting themselves in
the line of fire all the time. . . . It's a sensible plan. It's a
thoughtful plan. I think Democrats can coalesce around it."

Reed, an Army veteran and former paratrooper who has been charged with
developing a party strategy on the war, said the plan is attractive to
many Democrats because it rejects what he calls the ''false dichotomy"
suggested by President Bush: that the only options in Iraq are ''stay
the course" or ''cut and run."

''It's important to note that it's not withdrawal -- it's
redeployment," Reed said. ''We need to pursue a strategy that is going
to accomplish the reasonable objectives, and allow us to have
strategic flexibility. Not only is it a message, but it's a method to
improve the security there and around the globe."

The idea of a phased deployment of troops out of Iraq recognizes that
a huge US military presence in the country is straining the armed
services as well as feeding the insurgency, Reed said. He added that
many military commanders agree that the nation should be moving toward
taking American troops out of Iraq, to better equip the military to
respond to threats around the world and give the Iraqi government a
greater incentive to handle its own security.

Under Korb's outline, all reservists and National Guard members would
come home this year. Most of the other troops would be redeployed to
other key areas -- Afghanistan, Southeast Asia, and the Horn of Africa
-- with large, quick-strike forces placed in Kuwait, where they could
respond to crises in neighboring Iraq.

Korb said in an interview that setting dates for troop withdrawal
would send a message to the Iraqi people that the United States does
not intend to set up permanent military bases in Iraq. Starting the
redeployment quickly will ensure that the Army does not wear out
before the insurgents do, he said.

''The Iraqis want us to go," said Korb, who has opposed Bush's
decision to invade Iraq from the start. ''If you're out by the end of
2007, we'll have been there almost five years. That's not cutting and
running."

But some strategists say the goal of a near-total withdrawal within
two years is overly optimistic. US troops that are a plane ride away
won't be an effective deterrent, and Iraqi security forces appear
unlikely to be able to handle the violence on their own in the near
future, said Michael O'Hanlon, a centrist defense specialist who is a
lecturer at Princeton University.

''You're demanding that the political system produces a miracle,"
O'Hanlon said. ''Any plan that envisions complete American withdrawal
in such a period of time is still a prescription for strategic
defeat."

The war has been a source of long-running tension among Democrats.
Twenty-nine Democratic senators and 81 House Democrats voted to
authorize the president to invade Iraq, and while most are now
critical of Bush's handling of the war, some -- notably Senator Joseph
I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut -- remain staunch supporters.

Although ''strategic redeployment" could draw a large portion of
Democrats into the same fold, Reed and other Democrats disagree with
setting a timeline for troop withdrawal, saying that such decisions
should be dictated by commanders on the ground.

Still, Reed noted that the Bush administration has begun modest troop
withdrawals. The Senate in November overwhelmingly approved a
resolution calling for 2006 to be ''a period of significant transition
to full Iraqi sovereignty," and on Friday, the White House issued a
statement reiterating its position: ''In 2006, it is anticipated that
the Iraqi military will take more of the lead for security throughout
Iraq."

But the president has strongly rejected issuing any time frames,
arguing that they would be exploited by insurgents who would strike as
soon as troops leave Iraq. Democrats who have suggested time frames
for withdrawal have faced harsh attacks from Republicans, who paint
them as offering a strategy of defeat.

In November, Representative John P. Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat,
shook much of Washington with his call for an immediate withdrawal of
troops, and his estimate that all troops could be out of Iraq within
six months. The generally hawkish Vietnam veteran also called for
quick strike forces to remain close to Iraq -- similar to the Korb
plan -- but that was largely overlooked in the barrage from
Republicans.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the Murtha plan amounted to
''surrender to the terrorists."

Representative Jean Schmidt, Republican of Ohio, delivered a
blistering speech on the House floor aimed at Murtha, who spent 37
years in the Marine Corps: ''Cowards cut and run, Marines never do,"
Schmidt said, in remarks she later withdrew from the Congressional
Record.

The attacks on Murtha demonstrated the political peril that could face
Democrats who offer plans involving troop withdrawals.

Although Murtha has 99 House cosponsors for his plan, some Democrats
remain skittish about offering a plan that they know would be attacked
harshly -- and, they say, almost certainly misconstrued -- by
political opponents.

Still, Dean, Reed, and others in the party are trying to develop a
united Democratic vision for Iraq, based in part on the calculation
that the war will be a big factor in many 2006 congressional
campaigns.

Representative Martin T. Meehan, a Lowell Democrat who voted in favor
of the war and now supports the Murtha plan, said that while the war
remains Bush's responsibility, Democrats should be able to tell voters
what they would do differently.

''There are a lot of different views, but I personally believe that
putting forward specifics about how to move forward in Iraq is
important to do," said Meehan, a member of the House Armed Services
Committee. ''I would like to see Democrats coalesce around a strategy
like Korb's strategy."

This fall, in elections that Democrats hope will bring them back to
power in Congress, more than 50 military veterans are running in
congressional races as Democrats.

Those candidates are asked about Iraq all the time, and the idea of
strategic redeployment is appealing to many of them, said Eric Massa,
who is challenging an incumbent Republican in upstate New York and is
helping to organize strategy for the veterans who are running.

''You can't stand in front of people and say, 'We want your vote,' and
not tell people what it is they're voting for," said Massa, a former
Navy officer. ''We all know that staying the course is not a strategy
that's going to work." ++

It is not enough to be compassionate; you must act.
-- The Dalai Lama