We now return you to your regularly scheduled disaster

Reuters reported on Saturday that

[d]ozens of insurgents mounted a sustained attack on Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad on Saturday, detonating two suicide car bombs and firing rocket-propelled grenades before U.S. troops repelled the assault.

At least 20 U.S. soldiers and 12 detainees were wounded in the carefully planned attack, which began at around 1500 GMT and lasted for around an hour, the U.S. military said. ...

The jail has been attacked in the past, but the latest assault was believed to be the largest and most determined. It is also the first against the prison for some time, and comes amid recent signs that Iraq's insurgency was calming down.

The number of wounded was later raised to 44, although most injuries were claimed to be minor.

"Calming down" in this case meant that the number of attacks per day had dropped; in February, Defense Secretary Donald Rumplestiltskin was told that they had dropped from about 50 per day to about 20; late in March it was claimed they were down to about 10. But the figures turned out to be misleading because they apparently focused on a certain area where most of the insurgent attacks had come earlier. However, ABC News (Australia) reported last week that

[i]n a separate CNN interview, George Casey, the commanding US general of the Multi-National Force in Iraq, told the news network that current insurgent assaults were running at between 50 and 60 attacks a day.

Casey claimed this was a sign of weakness, but it seems that every bit of news is described as a sign of weakness on the insurgency.

Meanwhile, much, no doubt, will be made of the fact that after weeks of wrangling, including

last week's acrimonious and nationally televised failure to reach a deal

that frustrated and angered Iraqis and clearly damaged its image, the Iraqi parliament has finally elected a speaker.

As expected, the man selected is a Sunni Arab. His name is Hajim al-Hassani and until now he was minister of industry. The next two biggest vote-getters, Hussain al-Shahristani, a Shiite, and Kurdish leader Aref Taifour were elected as al-Hassani's deputies. (Funny how it worked out so conveniently: a Sunni, a Shiite, and a Kurd. It was a secret ballot, but I feel confident the result was pre-arranged.)

And that was the easy part. Now

the parliament can move ahead with tackling the much bigger task of deciding on the country's president and two deputy presidents.

Once those positions are approved by a two-thirds majority of the assembly, the presidential council will have two weeks to name a prime minister, who will then draw up a cabinet.

All those posts are already being worked on....

And maybe with some success: Reuters is reporting that a deal has already been cut on the next steps.

The National Assembly is expected to announce the names of the country's new president, two vice presidents and prime minister by Wednesday....

The Shiite alliance and the Kurds have agreed that Jalal Talabani, the leader of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), will become Iraq's new president while Ibrahim Jaafari, a veteran Shiite politician, will be the prime minister.

Adel Abdul Mahdi, a senior UIA [United Iraqi Alliance] leader, is expected to serve as one of Iraq's two vice presidents, while talks are still under way to select a Sunni Arab as the second.

There are still wide differences between the Shiites and the Kurds over very central issues, one of which is the obvious one over how much of a role religion should play in the government and constitution; another is arguments over who should get what ministry - but I persist in thinking the most important one is the issue of federalism. That's the hard rock which the government will either break or be broken by. For over a year I've been making repeated references to the Kurds' desire for an Iraqi federation in which they would have extensive autonomy at least similar to what they've had since Gulf War I and that they feel their time for a Kurdistan, de facto if not de jure, has come.

But a federation is exactly what the Shiites do not want. Long repressed, now the majority in the government, they are unlikely to be willing to let a significant portion of the territory of Iraq, not to mention a fair portion of its oil fields, move beyond their control. I've maintained all along that the threat of civil war over this is all too real. So far, that prospect has been kept on the back burner - but sooner or later that confrontation is going to have to take place, sooner or later the issue of Kurdish sovereignty or at least autonomy will have to be faced. That will be the true make-or-break moment.

I can't say I'm hopeful, but there is still some wiggle room on both sides. Practicality and a bone-weariness with bloodshed may yet trump ideology and nationalist fervor.

Footnote: This does not make me feel any better:

Baghdad (UPI, April 3) - Iraqi state television said Sunday an unspecified number of legislators have either pulled out or resigned from the National Assembly.

The channel quoted a member of the Shiite bloc in parliament, Hammam Hammoudi, as saying the legislators resigned either for security reasons or to protest their exclusion from the government being formed.

The former reason points to the continuing effect of the "weakening" insurgency, the latter points to the power of ego and sectarianism. So far, this remains a government in name only.