Iraq: Not an unraveling, but a stalemate? And still more violent than Afghanistan

I was
thinking recently that I was wrong about Iraq, because I expected it to fall apart, but it hasn't.

By
coincidence, a few minutes later I read Joel Wing's summary of the state
of things in Iraq,
which interested me because he always has been more optimistic about Iraq than
I have. He concludes that Iraq is stuck in a political deadlock that is causing an annual cycle of violence:

After the summer is over, attacks and deaths will go down in Iraq.
The problem is that the routine will repeat itself next year, and the year
after that until there is a change in the status quo. That will not come from
the security forces that are set in their ways. Only the political class can
bring about a real transformation. In 2009 and 2010, large numbers of Sunnis
participated in elections after largely boycotting them in 2005. That led to a
drop in casualties. Now, things are going in the other direction, as the ruling
parties are moving farther and farther apart in their feud over the
distribution of power, increasing ethnosectarian tensions. That growing
resentment within the country, gives some the reason to fight rather than
reconcile adding life to the insurgency. The problem for Iraq is that nothing
looks to be changing the political deadlock, and in turn the security situation
will not improve either.

Wing
also reports that Iraq even now is more violent
than Afghanistan.
Indeed, over the weekend there were bombings in Baghdad, Kirkuk, Baquba, Samarra,
Amara, Basra, Dujail, and Tuz Khurmato.

Meanwhile,
Iraq is allowing Iran to fly military supplies through its airspace to Syria.

And an
Iraqi MP called for dumping the U.S. and starting an
alliance with Russia.
Frankly, okay by me. Knock yourself out.