May 15 (Bloomberg) -- Iraq has reached its peak of stability and conditions probably won’t improve before the U.S. withdraws its troops, said Richard Haass, a former top official in both Bush administrations.

“There’s a ceiling on how good it can ever get, given the nature of Iraqi society, given the schisms,” Haass said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” airing this weekend. “I’d be happy, quite honestly, in two or three years, if Iraq looked no worse.”

Haass, now president of the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations, recently returned from a visit to Iraq. President Barack Obama plans to withdraw combat forces by Aug. 31, 2010, and all troops by the end of 2011, and focus more on the war in Afghanistan.

Haass, who served in the White House under President George H.W. Bush and then as a State Department policy planner under George W. Bush, said he would advise Obama to “put greater focus on Pakistan, rather than Afghanistan.”

In Pakistan, where the nuclear-armed central government is battling Taliban militants, there’s an “enormous” gap between the high U.S. stakes and the “quite modest” prospect of influencing the outcome, Haass, 57, said.

“That disparity ought to frighten people,” Haass said.

Porous Border

Al-Qaeda fighters fled across the porous border from Afghanistan when the U.S. ousted the Taliban from power in Kabul in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York and the Pentagon.

“There’s very little we can do to ensure” that Pakistan succeeds, Haass said. “It’s quite possible, at some point over the next few years, we’ll have to deal with a Pakistani state that essentially can’t govern, can’t function in the country.”

On the war in Afghanistan, Haass would advise reconsidering the U.S. role in a year should the conflict fail to show progress. Obama’s plan to ramp up involvement, including funneling in another 17,000 troops and 4,000 trainers to upgrade the Afghan army, is “a major risk,” Haass said.

“Essentially we’ve declared that we’re going to take the fight to the Taliban,” he said. “We are going to become a participant in Afghanistan’s civil war.”

The U.S. is still paying the “so-called opportunity costs” of the Bush administration’s war in Iraq, Haass said.

‘Major Distraction’

“It was a major distraction,” he said. “It was a major sponge of U.S. time and attention.”

Obama, during a stop in Baghdad last month, urged Iraqi leaders to press harder for political unity among the country’s religious and ethnic factions. The commander of U.S. forces in Iraq said last week that the interim step of pulling troops from major cities by June 30 is “on track,” even with a recent spate of suicide bombings.

On the Middle East peace process, Haass said Obama, who is scheduled to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House on May 18, might make more progress by encouraging Israel to be “more open” toward a deal with Syria.

“That might be actually a better place to invest in the short run than with the Palestinians, given the weakness and divisions on the Palestinian side and given the divisions within the Israeli government,” Haass said.

Haass rejected suggestions by former Vice President Dick Cheney and others that the Obama administration’s decisions on issues such as banning harsh interrogation tactics have made the U.S. more vulnerable, saying it’s too soon to tell.

To the contrary, the strain on the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan and the U.S. recession left the country in worse condition by the end of George W. Bush’s two terms in office, he said.

‘Answer to History’

“Essentially, the U.S. position had deteriorated,” Haass said. The Bush administration is “going to have to answer to history.”

Haass, whose new book “War of Necessity, War of Choice,” contrasts Bush’s handling of the 2003 Iraq invasion with his father’s approach to the Gulf War in 1991, said the elder Bush was “much more systematic.”

He was conscious of historical examples that signaled potential dangers, said Haass, who was a special assistant to the president and a senior director on the National Security Council at that time.

The younger Bush was “much more interested in being bold” and “often saw reconsideration as a sign of weakness rather than leadership,” said Haass, who served under Secretary of State Colin Powell in that administration.

To contact the reporter on this story: Viola Gienger in Washington at vgienger@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: May 15, 2009 12:37 EDT