But it wasn't about the oil. Not at all.

On blogs where the Bush administration's proposed "security framework agreement" with Iraq has been discussed, the question has come up of why the July 31st deadline. My answer has been electoral politics: An agreement that extends the U.S. military presence indefinitely is the "victory" and "success" that the regime would like to show for its policy, and that McCain can run on.

But if it's not politics, it's business, Bush's base. Today's New York Times business section brings the news that four oil majors are close to returning to Iraq, having almost wrapped up negotiations on no-bid foothold contracts:

Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP — the original partners in the Iraq Petroleum Company — along with Chevron and a number of smaller oil companies, are in talks with Iraq’s Oil Ministry for no-bid contracts to service Iraq’s largest fields, according to ministry officials, oil company officials and an American diplomat.

The deals, expected to be announced on June 30, will lay the foundation for the first commercial work for the major companies in Iraq since the American invasion, and open a new and potentially lucrative country for their operations. [emphasis added]

So there'll be plenty for President Obama's residual force to do:

Any Western oil official who comes to Iraq would require heavy security, exposing the companies to all the same logistical nightmares that have hampered previous attempts, often undertaken at huge cost, to rebuild Iraq’s oil infrastructure.

And work in the deserts and swamps that contain much of Iraq’s oil reserves would be virtually impossible unless carried out solely by Iraqi subcontractors, who would likely be threatened by insurgents for cooperating with Western companies.

Mr. Big takes a vacation

What a coincidence: A day after Jalal Talabani, President of Iraq and head of the party governing Kurdistan, is flown to a hospital in Jordan, Iraq and Turkey agree to postpone the referendum on the status of Kirkuk.

Originally mandated by the 2005 constitution to take place by the end of this year, the referendum has the potential to feed the violence in and around Kirkuk. During the 1980s and 1990s, the Ba'ath government drove out Kurds there and moved in Iraqi Arabs; after the U.S. invasion, Kurds moved back in large numbers, amid attacks on Arabs. In the last year, in anticipation of the referendum, Kurds have intensified their re-population of the city, but attacks and bombings against them have also risen. Turkmens have also suffered attacks; they are a small but significant percentage of the population in Kirkuk.

Now the referendum might not take place for two years. This news comes on the heels of reports that the Kurdish parties have signed off on the new oil law that hands Iraq's reserves over to the oil majors on a platter. The Kurds were the last obstacle; the Iraqi cabinet approved the law yesterday. Did I mention that most of the oil in northern Iraq is near Kirkuk?

A recent profile of Talabani by Jon Lee Anderson in the New Yorker, 'Mr. Big' [apparently not online], begins by describing how he goes into seclusion during crises. This flight to Jordan sounds like more of the same, as both the approval of the oil law and the postponement of the Kirkuk referendum are serious concessions/defeats for the Kurds.