In advance of tonight’s exclusive profile on 60 Minutes of McCain’s trip to Iraq last week, he penned an op-ed piece for today’s Washington Post:

I just returned from my fifth visit to Iraq since 2003 — and my first since Gen. David Petraeus’s new strategy has started taking effect. For the first time, our delegation was able to drive, not use helicopters, from the airport to downtown Baghdad. For the first time, we met with Sunni tribal leaders in Anbar province who are working with American and Iraqi forces to combat al-Qaeda. For the first time, we visited Iraqi and American forces deployed in a joint security station in Baghdad — an integral part of the new strategy. We held a news conference to discuss what we saw: positive signs, underreported in the United States, that are reason for cautious optimism.

I observed that our delegation “stopped at a local market, where we spent well over an hour, shopping and talking with the local people, getting their views and ideas about different issues of the day.” Markets in Baghdad have faced devastating terrorist attacks. A car bombing at Shorja in February, for example, killed 137 people. Today the market still faces occasional sniper attacks, but it is safer than it used to be. One innovation of the new strategy is closing markets to vehicles, thereby precluding car bombs that kill so many and garner so much media attention. Petraeus understandably wanted us to see this development.

I went to Iraq to gain a firsthand view of the progress in this difficult war, not to celebrate any victories. No one has been more critical of sunny progress reports that defied realities in Iraq. In 2003, after my first visit, I argued for more troops to provide the security necessary for political development. I disagreed with statements characterizing the insurgency as a “few dead-enders” or being in its “last throes.” I repeatedly criticized the previous search-and-destroy strategy and argued for a counterinsurgency approach: separating the reconcilable population from the irreconcilable and creating enough security to facilitate the political and economic solutions that are the only way to defeat insurgents. This is exactly the course that Petraeus and the brave men and women of the American military are pursuing.

The new political-military strategy is beginning to show results. But most Americans are not aware because much of the media are not reporting it or devote far more attention to car bombs and mortar attacks that reveal little about the strategic direction of the war. I am not saying that bad news should not be reported or that horrific terrorist attacks are not newsworthy. But news coverage should also include evidence of progress. Whether Americans choose to support or oppose our efforts in Iraq, I hope they could make their decision based on as complete a picture of the situation in Iraq as is possible to report.

He goes on to provide some new and encouraging examples of the changing situation on the ground in Iraq.

The WaPo also had a frontpage article, yesterday, on the fact that McCain is intent on staking his candidacy on Iraq. I’ve long said that it’s not Rudy or Romney, his problems with social conservatives or his age that pose the greatest risk to his candidacy, it’s the Iraq War. McCain is tied so closely to the war, despite, as he says, being one of the toughest critics of its conduct. He plans on making a major speech at the VMI on Wednesday urging Americans to give the surge a chance to succeed. It is certainly an extremely risky gamble. If the surge fails, the bottom will likely drop out in terms of domestic support and Bush would have few options left besides beginning a withdrawl. However, if the surge succeeds it will be a huge boon to McCain’s campaign and make his path to the nomination easier. In the meantime, his strong support is helping him win support from conservatives who had been skeptical of him in the past. Jonah Goldberg says that it is a “bold, brave and possibly even smart move on McCain’s part.”

The contrast between McCain and his rivals is stark. McCain is the only candidate in either party (with the possible exception of Joe Biden) who doesn’t shy away from discussing the war. It’s the single most important event that this country’s had to deal with since Vietnam. If you watch Rudy and Romney’s speeches they treat Iraq like it’s a mere afterthought, if they event mention it at all. It’s not hard to realize that they want to distance themselves as much as possible. It also gives them an opportunity to run to McCain’s left on the war if things continue to go badly come summer. You’re already seeing that with Romney advocating a “private timetable and benchmarks” for US troops.

But as McCain is fond of saying:

Recognize that presidents don’t lose wars and parties don’t lose wars. Nations lose wars and the consequences are felt by the nation.

You may not agree with McCain’s stance on the war, but at least he is putting the health of this country ahead of any political aspirations that he has. That is the true definition of a patriot.