The “unblockable” part is key in Kuwait’s unique governmental system where the monarch-appointed Prime Minister can add 15 MPs of his own to parliament through cabinet appointments, meaning his faction has a built-in 15-seat lead before any elections take place. Even if none of his cabinet members are existing MPs, the Islamists will hold a 34-31 lead.

Exactly what an opposition-led parliament will mean for Kuwait is unclear. The Kuwaiti parliament is theoretically more powerful than those of other regional monarchies, but it will remain in opposition to the sitting cabinet.

Kuwait’s Islamist bloc is led by a combination of Salafists and the somewhat more moderate Muslim Brotherhood factions, and has traditionally focused on anti-corruption measures as well as efforts to implement Sharia law. Previous attempts at tackling corruption led to the Emir dissolving the parliament in 2008, claiming the legislators were “misusing their powers.”

Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, head of U.S. Central Command, got approval from the Obama administration for the surge just after talks with Baghdad broke down over keeping a large U.S. occupation force in Iraq. But the extent of the build-up is only now becoming clear.

Earlier this week, the U.S. sent a second aircraft carrier strike group into the Persian Gulf,partly in response to recent Iranian threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, where one-fifth of the world’s oil shipments passes. Those threats themselves were issued in response to aggressive military build-up, crippling economic sanctions, and covert war coming from the U.S. and its allies.

Arms transfers to key allies in the Gulf, including the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, et al., have also been sped up in recent months as a further deterrent to Iran.

Additionally, the status approximately 15,000 U.S. troops in Kuwait is currently being negotiated. The Kuwaiti defense minister was previously quoted as saying the number of troops would decrease. But now that seems unlikely, with new talks taking place over having Kuwait host a large enough number of troops to respond to potential regional war and other “threats.”

The U.S. primarily maintains troops and military bases throughout the Middle East in order to control the flow of the region’s oil resources and prevent any other state from gaining regional military power that would challenge that of America. But surges such as this one do more to destabilize and threaten war than act as a bulwark against it.

“We decided to submit our resignation to comply with the national interest and due to the danger the situation had reached,” Kuwaiti state media reported Prime Minister Sheikh Nasser al-Mohammad al-Sabah as saying.

Kuwait’s ruler, Sheik Sabah Al Ahmed Al Sabah, who appoints the prime minister, accepted the resignation but asked the Cabinet to remain in a caretaker role. This is expected to anger an already animated opposition and tens of thousands of protesters. Whether or not this is an effective dismissal of the resignation, or a genuine transition has yet to be seen.

Kuwaiti protesters stormed parliament earlier this month, angered over corruption and a harsh response from security forces at a demonstration outside the prime minister’s home. At least 45 people were arrested in the incident.

The small Gulf state has seen less of the protest movement of the “Arab Spring,” relatively speaking. But Kuwait is an important client state of the United States, receiving considerable money and weapons and stationing tens of thousands of U.S. troops there. Further turmoil has the potential to influence further U.S. interference.

The march came in the wake of an earlier demonstration in front of Sabah’s home, which ended when members of the “elite forces” attacked those protesters, seriously wounding at least five in beatings. The news of the injuries fueled the anger that led to the storming of parliament.

Local media downplayed the significance of the march, saying that they briefly chanted before being forced out of the building. The corruption scandal has already claimed their former Foreign Minister, who had to resign last month on charges of being involved in a royal family plot to funnel money into overseas accounts.

Sabah, a key member of the royal family, is also believed to have been heavily involved in the plot. The protests are the first sign of Arab Spring-style demonstrations in Kuwait since January, when the regime responded to calls to protest with an announcement of a $3,500 grant for every Kuwaiti and vouchers for free food.

The US appears to have taken virtually everything of even marginal value out of the palace on their way out, and reports say that the troops even took Saddam’s toilet with them, which will wind up in some US museum, officials say.

The US still has about 39,000 troops in Iraq, which under the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) it is obliged to remove by the end of next month. US officials insist they will comply.

Reports are that the US is planning to replace its direct occupation both with an army of State Department contractors inside Iraq and a massive deployment of combat troops in Kuwait. The Kuwaiti government denied the report, however, saying they didn’t expect a long-term buildup in their nation after the troops leave Iraq.

But now the New York Times reports that the Obama Administration is planning a massive troop surge into Kuwait and the surrounding region, as well as a major naval buildup in international waters in the area.

The new surge certainly has one eye on Iraq, where violence is still high and where the US has built a Vatican-sized embassy (filled with its own private contractor army for the State Department), but the other eye is squarely on Iran.

Though having massive numbers of troops bogged down in the Iraqi quagmire seemed a funny way of doing it, officials were constantly trumpeting this as having a massive force in the region “against Iran.” Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates even argued in his final major policy speech that the US should keep troops in Iraq entirely to “make Iran uncomfortable.”

But since that plan fell through, the fallback is now to try to dramatically increase military ties with the GCC nations (fresh off their brutal crackdown on pro-democracy protesters in Bahrain) and to deploy massive numbers of troops in the region through them, as a way to spite Iran.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton defended the escalation plan, saying it was “proof of our ongoing commitment to Iraq and to the future of that region, which holds such promise and should be freed from outside interference to continue on the pathway to democracy.” No word yet if she managed to say that with a straight face.

Of course the 3,000 figure was already misleading, not counting the untold thousands of military and State Department contractors that will also be fighting in Iraq. New reports coming out today suggest we may have underestimated the administration’s ability to deceive even more, revealing a plot that would keep large numbers of combat troops fighting in Iraq.

Fighting in Iraq, but not deployed there, as the report has the administration mulling a major deployment into neighboring Kuwait, “pre-positioned” along the border and ready to launch attacks inside Iraq at a moment’s notice.

Army Chief of Staff and former Iraq commander Gen. Ray Odierno had warned against keeping large numbers of troops inside Iraq, warning it would “provoke new claims of US occupation.” The occupation force may, instead, wait on the outskirts to reassert itself.

The opposition to the port centers from concern that it will reduce the value Iraq’s own nearby port of Grand Faw. This led a number of Iraqis to rally against the Kuwaiti project, with the port being the latest in a long line of bones of contention between the two.

Now, it seems, matters have gone beyond simple protest, as a group inside Iraq has fired a number of rockets against Kuwait. So far the rockets fell short of Kuwaiti territory, but led to angry complaints from Kuwait and a rebuke from Iraqi MPs, who warned that the situation could escalate.

The violence is stemming from Shi’ite militias, but angry protests from the ruling State of Law bloc suggest that the issue has currency across Iraq and threats that the port could lead to Iraqi terror attacks against Kuwait suggest the issue isn’t going to be an easy one to solve.

One of the crown jewels of secret pre-Gulf War negotiations was unveiled tonight when the notorious Glaspie Memo, or as it is now known 90BAGHDAD423, was released by WikiLeaks

The cable, whose official title was “Saddam’s Message of Friendship to President Bush” details the meeting between US Ambassador April Glaspie and Saddam Hussein on July 25, 1990, just a week before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

The meeting has long been a matter of speculation, as it had long been speculated that comments by Glaspie had led Saddam to believe that the United States was giving them the green light to invade Kuwait if diplomacy failed.

The memo reveals indeed Hussein expressing concern about the Bush Administration’s position on Iraq owing to its participation in military exercises with the United Arab Emirates and pledges to “defend its allies” in the region. He complained the US pledges were making Kuwait and the UAE refuse to negotiate with Iraq. He also expressed concern about negative media coverage in the US, which Ambassador Glaspie assured him did not reflect US policy and singled out a Diane Sawyer report on “nuclear bomb triggers” for condemnation.

Rather Glaspie assured Saddam of Bush’s friendship and expressed support for the negotiations being set up by Hosni Mubarak for the weekend of July 28-30. She also explicitly said the United States took no position on the border dispute between Iraq and Kuwait, though the summary also mentions that she made clear the US wanted the move solved peacefully. Hussein assured that no action would be taken against Kuwait if the negotiations showed some progress, which seemed to suit the US at the time.

But the talks didn’t accomplish anything and by August 2 Iraq was invading Kuwait. Within hours the mutual friendship was completely torn up and US officials were railing against Iraq. A few months later the US invaded for the first time, sparking invasions, decades of enmity, sanctions which killed massive numbers of Iraqi civilians and, eventually, a full US occupation which continues to this day.

Unveiling a plan at a Washington DC conference, government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said it was time for the region to think of itself entering a new era, with Iraq playing a more assertive role.

The plan called for a “Regional Economic Partnership” including Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait, Jordan, Syria and Turkey, with Iraq at its heart. The bloc would lift barriers to trade, integrate security, and share energy across its members. Dabbagh said informal discussions have already been held with Syria, Kuwait and Turkey, and said Iraq hoped to “convert the region into the EU model.”