President Bush's speech yesterday was perhaps one of the worst-kept secrets in Washington, D.C. For months, the president declined to give any definitive answers on his plans in Iraq, opting instead to wait for a report by Gen. David Petraeus. After that report was delivered, the nation knew what to expect from the presidential speech: a rollback of troops to pre-surge numbers, and a call for patience.

And, indeed, that's just what President Bush called for — a reduction of troop levels by 5,700 by the end of the year, and a drawdown from 20 combat brigades to 15 by next summer. And, yes, patience.

What has remained a secret, however, is how the White House plans to bolster its political and diplomatic strategies in and around Iraq. Even Gen. Petraeus, along with Ambassador Ryan Crocker, seem to be in the dark on that issue. During their testimony before Congress last week, they admitted that political progress in Iraq — the main reason for sending the additional 30,000 troops to Iraq — has "stagnated," and they declined to answer what they would recommend if the political situation does not improve.

President Bush assured the nation that progress has been made, that the surge has helped protect the Iraqi people and has put a dent in sectarian violence. But such optimistic tones were belied by the assassination of Sunni sheik Abdul-Sattar Risha earlier in the day, who led an alliance that backed the Iraqi government and U.S. forces.

The assassination served as a brutal warning that anyone who cooperates with coalition forces will likely face consequences. It also served as a reminder of the ongoing political instability in Iraq.

The nation and the Iraqi people now know the military plan — at least through next summer.

But when it comes to the political and diplomatic strategies that are crucial to stability, it's a secret the Bush administration has yet to share.

On that front, Americans and Iraqis have been patient enough.