As Americans debate how long to keep their troops in Iraq and whether the government of Shi'ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki can deliver peace, Iraqis too are torn over the same questions.

An informal survey by Reuters in several cities across Iraq shows many blame U.S. forces for insecurity and want to see them leave now. But many others say U.S. troops are preventing far worse violence and hope they stay.

Many say their own politicians have squandered an opportunity to resolve sectarian tensions. But others credit Maliki with making the best of a difficult situation.

U.S. ambassador Ryan Crocker and commander General David Petraeus will report to a divided Washington on Sept. 10 on the progress of President George W. Bush's strategy of sending 30,000 extra troops to Iraq this year.

The testimony of Crocker and Petraeus could be decisive in determining the fate of the 160,000-strong U.S. force in Iraq.

Democrats who control Congress, and some senior members of Bush's Republican Party, say U.S. forces should leave. Bush said on Monday any force reduction would be made from a position of strength, and would not come in response to political pressure.

Iraqis -- on the one hand fearful of American troops, on the other hand afraid of the sectarian violence that could erupt if they depart -- have similar arguments every day.

"The security situation has improved in Baghdad due to the new tactics used by the U.S forces to chase militiamen and Sunni insurgents," said Hadi Ali, 41, an Iraqi army officer in Tikrit, home town of Saddam Hussein.

"Pulling out U.S troops will disrupt all efforts to create a safe Iraq."

But across town, schoolteacher Raad Mohammed said: "The withdrawal of U.S forces is the dream of all honourable Iraqis. The occupation is a nightmare in our life."

U.S. officials say the "surge" of forces has improved security. But they have also expressed frustration that Iraqi politicians have made only limited progress toward enacting measures aimed at fostering national reconciliation.

A Congressional report on Tuesday said the Iraqi government has fallen short of several political benchmarks, a verdict Crocker is expected to echo next week.

Many Iraqis say Maliki, a member of a Shi'ite Islamist party, has failed to reach out to other groups.

"Maliki is only paying attention to his party, rather than considering the interests of Iraq," said Qadir Hussein, 36, a Baghdad civil servant.

"An independent prime minister is the only hope to have a unified, successful government in Iraq."

But Baghdad university professor Samer Qasim, 45, said: "Maliki is a good figure and not sectarian."

He added that a deal signed on Aug. 26 between Shi'ite, Kurdish and Sunni Arab political leaders to work towards reconciliation was "clear evidence that the government is acting seriously to reconcile all Iraqi parties".

"Maliki started with reconciliation but he did not see it through to success," added Ammar Hassan, 35, a day labourer in the southern, mainly-Shi'ite oil centre of Basra.

"I do not think Maliki failed, but he has big challenges."

Many Iraqis are well aware of the political debate in Washington and how it affects Baghdad.

"Maliki's fragile government is facing tremendous pressure to fulfil U.S. benchmarks, aimed at saving Bush's face," said Wael Mohammed al-Moussawi, 35, in the Shi'ite city of Najaf.

"But Maliki is too weak to meet the demands and he'd better quit for failing to lead the country towards the shore of safety."

Others fretted at what would happen if his government fell.

"The political process would go back to square one," said Ahmed Tahir, 45, a retired civil servant in the ethnically mixed northern city of Kirkuk.