STARING INTO THE ABYSS.

This article discusses mounting casualties, security challenges and the political conundrum of Iraq. The somber 1,000 mark has little military significance, but it's an emotional--and very political--moment for a nation embroiled in both its deadliest military engagement since the Vietnam War and the final stretch of a divisive election campaign. President Bush's advisers claim that most Americans have come to accept that there will be continuing casualties in Iraq and won't be swayed by a milestone like the 1,000 mark.They are also buoyed by recent polls, which show Bush opening a small lead over Senator. John Kerry, especially on the critical issue of handling terrorism. In Iraq, the 1,000th casualty, combined with an alarming spike in the rate at which soldiers are suffering serious injuries, is also a signal that while the transition to an interim government was an important sign of progress, it has done little to undermine the insurgency. The U.S. military acknowledged last week what has been obvious to many in Iraq--that it has little or no control over large swaths of Sunni-dominated areas. Another huge obstacle for the planned election: U.S. officials complain that the United Nations has fallen far behind in its preparations. Very few U.N. staffers are allowed in Iraq, and especially outside central Baghdad, because of security concerns. Most are still working from neighboring Jordan. And with new kidnappings of international aid workers, other humanitarian groups are also re-evaluating their ability to operate inside Iraq. More than a year after U.S. forces seized Baghdad, a study by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies looked at five main sectors--security, governance, economic opportunity, services, and social well-being--and its conclusions were grim. Says Bathsheba Crocker, the project's codirector: "It is worrisome that in all the sectors aside from governance, Iraq is actually moving backward."