First, the Arab League does not have the institutional capacity to even be a player, regardless of the fact that it is so badly divided at present that it could not possibly achieve any kind of effective operation in Iraq, or the fact that the Kurds would never accept an Arab League focused 'administration.'

Second, in regards to elegant federal state solutions and the like, the commentators are presuming that constitutional arrangements will have some meaning. There is quite simply not the institutional capacity to make a tripartite administrative structure work. However elegant, the reality will follow actual adminstrative and governmental norms - which in the Arab region are centralizing and authoritarian.

Third, in regards to population, commentators here are presuming that lines can be drawn - ex-the extreme Kurdish north and the Western central region, most of Iraq is rather mixed - e.g. the Baghdad area is mixed Sunni and Shiite, and that holds to the south of Baghdad. No clear line can be drawn there, so speaking to a presumed "Sunni" state makes no fucking sense at all. Then, of course, the Arab (Sunni and Shiite, largely Sunni) / Turcomans (Shiite and Sunni, apparent majority of Shiites) / Kurd (Sunni and Shiite, majority Sunni, but largely adhering to somewhat heterodox Sunni Sufi orders "line" in the North in the Kirkuk region is not at all clear. And again note that even in the North, with a majority Sunni Arabs as the non-Kurdish population, there are the largely Shiite Turcomans complicating the picture. The simplified imagery many of you have of the ethnic map is simply erroneous.

Fourth, de facto seperation has a different political logic than de jure seperation. De facto allows for looseness and fudging, de jure will create a political dynamic further favoring civil war as each ethnic group will have incentives to push for the maximalist position to lock in gains, and with little to no tradition of mediated and peaceful conflict or problem resolution, and in a situation where legitmate authority of any type does not obtain on the national level, there is almost no chance that civil war would be averted.

In short, one needs to get some realism before even pretending to think about what is possible here.

I may add that the comment supra about Arabs not being capable of democracy is pure bunk. What is true is that the socio-economic system and conditions prevailing in the region is not favorable to the instant creation of a fully operative democracy. Mass unemployment, dysfunctional economies and little recent indigenous experience with consultative decision making all preclude "instant democracy." It is not a question of an existential incapacity but rather the socio-economic conditions that obtain at present.