A lot of lefty bloggers say that there is an ongoing civil war taking place in Iraq right now. While that may be a nice frame I don't think calling it a civil war is correct, yet. For the most part the Sunnis have antagonized the other parties in their country but have been unable to spark any major conflict; which is, as most agree, a main goal of the insurgency in Iraq. I wrote about the mysterious activities that have taken place in Baghdad and around Iraq involving Sunni citizens being beaten and murdered by Iraqi police (although they could have been Sunnis impersonating Shiites who dominate the police) in order to further prod a future Civil War.

Anyway, if this war does occur; I think the beginnings of it will be in Southern Iraq. It is here where there is a major movement to create a region in the South of Iraq that would have "the same broad powers that the Kurds now have, including an independent parliament, ministries and regional military force." A group of secular Southern Shiites, including Ahmad Chalabi, lead the charge that is similar to the desires of the Kurdish citizens in the Northern area of Iraq. This may give the Kurdish independence movement more legitimacy and momentum, resulting in a three-way split of Iraq which would not be well received by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, or Iran; as well as the rest of the region when if the situation gets out of hand.

The reasoning for the movement is centered on oil/money which was held from the region by Saddam and is not reaching them now

The politicians argue that the long-impoverished south has never gotten its fair share of the country's oil money, even though the bulk of Iraqi oil reserves lie near Basra, at the head of the Persian Gulf.
...
The advocates of autonomy say that while the south has 80 to 90 percent of Iraq's oil reserves, the country's only ports and its richest date palm groves, the neglect under Mr. Hussein's rule is painfully evident: many of the avenues here resemble garbage dumps, open sewage floods some streets, and shantytowns dot the landscape. The south should have partial or full control over how its oil wealth and other income are distributed, the federalists say.

Another reason is frustration with the current government in Iraq

"There's no democracy in Iraq," Mr. Yasseen said, expressing the deep suspicions of moderate and secular Shiites. "Anyone who says there's democracy has a little Saddam in his head. He wants to become a Saddam."

Aid for the Kurds is giving support to the Balkanization of Iraq, and must be worrying Washington and the surrounding nations of the region.

"I support a real region in the south," said Abdul Khalik Zengana, a senior official in the Kurdistan Democratic Party, one of the two main Kurdish parties. "That will help our interests, and it will help to enhance federalism in Iraq. We bless this step. But we also think southern federalism should be decided on by a referendum of people in the south."

One interesting opponent is young radical Cleric Moktada al-Sadr; whom I would have thought would be for it. Shows what I know.