I think the sooner we disabuse ourselves of the fiction that Iraq is really a country, rather than just some lines drawn on a map for the convenience of the Brits after WW I, the better off we'll all be.

Good timing, too!  President Bush just announced his Plan for Victory that hinges on splitting the insurgency and convincing Sunni nationalists to come into the tent.  Not likely.  Perhaps that's why the Kurds announced it now -- they want a civil war.  It is, however, what's in the new Iraqi Constitution.  Thanks to peak oil, oil companies are hungry to book new reserves.  To do that, they need a lawful contract signed by a lawful entity.  The constitution has been adopted and the entire operation is now blessed by the UN Security Council.
Here are the perverse incentives: oil companies have more leverage over smaller regional governments and so want them to be stronger than the central government.  So, it's best for them if the pot boils enough to weaken the central government but not so much that the entire thing collapses into civil war.  The institutional arrangement is highly unstable and probably can't work unless the U.S. Pipeline Police remain indefinitely.

Also, don't forget that the borders of the Kurdish region have not yet been agreed.  Small matter of where you put Kirkuk and nearby oil fields.  I wonder what the contract says.  (Sorry about the duplicate post, friends.)

Looking at the entire Middle East, it is difficult to imagine anything other than an enforced peace within the area. As long as the US or Israel is around for whipping boy functions, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" will apply. Should the US get out of the area or Israel somehow manage to come to terms with the Palestinians, then local Muslim factions will become restless, each desiring power (ie, oil).

I think this is typical of what we can expect in ANY future, whether the US maintains a presence in the region or not. This area has always been tribal, and comfortable with it. I think that it simply doesn't matter whether we (the US) are there or not, the area is inherently unstable due to social and political forces that live on top of all this oil...

This should only add to the rationale and the push for AE!

What I want to know is this:  What on earth are the Norwegians thinking??!  Don't they know that this move will infuriate the US?  They are already an extremely wealthy country due to their own oil native oil endowment, for crying out loud!  Is it just me, or don't the Norwegians stand to lose a lot more (perhaps not in immediately tangible ways) than they stand to gain by this little stunt?

Any opinions out there as to whether the Norwegians are motivated by greed?  Or perhaps they WANT to provoke the US?  Or perhaps they are just clueless?