Maliki refuses to go after militias - planning for his future?

The USAToday has a very interesting article on an interview with Maliki. The lead is,

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said in an interview with USA TODAY that his government will not force militias to disarm until later this year or early next year, despite escalating violence in Baghdad fueled by death squads and religious warfare.

Let's put this in a little context. With James Baker and the ISG talking about a "stability option" and using phrases like "representative government, not necessarily democracy," implying the removal of Maliki.....

With the president dropping the word "democratic" from his definition of victory in Iraq.....

With the growing rumors of a "national rescue government," with that idea even being credited to Condi Rice.....

Isn't Maliki's interest better served siding with the militias? If he wants to maintain power, isn't Maliki better off finding the backing of the Shia militias and encouraging their violence to force a US withdrawal?

Just yesterday Maliki "indefinitely postponed" the national reconciliation conference. Something happened during Condi Rice's recent trip to Baghdad, and Maliki's posture appears to have openly shifted.

(I may be wrong, just something to watch for.)