Next week, President Bush, President Chirac, and Chancellor Schroeder will meet on the cliffs of Normandy to mark the 60th anniversary of the D-Day invasions that led to the liberation of Europe. They should also seize the moment to liberate themselves from the bitterness that has divided the Atlantic Alliance over the Iraq War, argue Pierre Lellouche and Christoph Bertram.

When the United States launched the war against Saddam Hussein's Iraq, France and Germany rightly warned that the invasion could well end up worsening instability in the Middle East and increase the threat of radical Islamic terror. But now that America and its coalition have proven themselves to be incapable of bringing stability to Iraq on their own, the French and German governments can no longer rest and smugly say, "I told you so," as the situation deteriorates even further. Both governments must now become seriously and fully engaged in what must now be a united Western effort.

Of course, it would be best for everyone - France and Germany included - if the current US-led coalition were to succeed and Iraq could turn into a pillar of Middle East stability and modernization. Yet, however desirable this outcome, it is no longer likely (if it ever was). Internal stability and economic recovery continue to be elusive, with the specter of civil war hovering ever closer. A divided Iraq at war with itself would be a disaster for the region, for America's international credibility and authority, and for transatlantic relations.

In an already fragile region, a major Arab country like Iraq would most likely prompt interventions by its nervous neighbors - of which there is no shortage - if it turns into a failed state. Instead of the rule of law, there would be the law of the mafia, of terrorist groups, and of tribal militias. Many of them are already in place. Instead of moving toward modernization and development, the region would be confirmed as a cockpit for conflict, a threat to itself and to the world beyond.

Were the US forced to withdraw in failure, Islamic terrorist groups would claim a historic victory, promising more bloodshed for the West. Moreover, America might also once again retreat bitterly into isolationism, blaming her failure on the UN and on disloyal European allies.

So the stakes are high in Iraq, for Europeans no less than for Americans. That is why it is time that even those who have been most skeptical about US policy in Iraq start to do something about it. Both Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schroeder have repeatedly pronounced that what happens in Iraq is a strategic challenge to their countries. Yet their actions in response to this insight have been modest.

The recent turmoil in Iraq has, on the contrary, strengthened those in both capitals who argue that there is now even less reason to get involved on the ground. At the very least, France and Germany are demanding that the Bush administration openly admit to its failure and the need for help. Yet not only is such a demand naïve, with the Bush team battling for re-election, it is not at all certain that most of America's European allies would heed a US call for solidarity if one were issued.

Confronting the threat that an unsettled Iraq poses to Europe and to the transatlantic relationship implies stopping these tactical games. The passing of authority in Iraq from the US-led coalition to an Iraqi government and the need for a much stronger UN role now offers the chance and imposes the need for everyone to stop posturing and get serious.

For their part, EU governments should provide the UN - on whose involvement in Iraq they have long insisted - with the protective force it needs to prepare nation-wide elections in Iraq later in the year, and ask others to join. A UN staff protected by US marines simply cannot do that job. With the consent of both the US and Iraq's new leadership, EU governments should also offer to organize an international conference uniting all those with a stake in Iraqi stability, including Iraq's neighbors, to work out a strategy and commit resources in order to save Iraq from slipping into protracted turmoil.

If Europe is to act, France and Germany must lead. Precisely because they opposed the war, they are now the only countries that can restore Europe's unity of action in promoting stability. France professes to bearing a special responsibility for international order, but so does Germany; only a few weeks ago, Chancellor Schroeder based his claim to a permanent German seat in the UN Security Council on Germany's readiness to shoulder such responsibilities. Of all the crisis regions in the world today, instability in Iraq constitutes the greatest challenge to international order.

But France and Germany can also block European responsibility for international order and for solidarity with a US facing possible defeat in Iraq. The decision is theirs. It is time for both to realize that the consequences of inaction will be no less severe for the region than for the Atlantic relationship.