The Bush Administration preaches democracy, but equates democracy with elections. In the case of Iraq, after deposing Saddam Hussein, who originally attained power as a dictator with the support of the American government when he no longer served U.S. interests, the American government resisted post-Saddam elections until forced the U.S. to allow Iraqi elections. Then, the U.S. made sure that only candidates vetted as being acceptable to U.S. interests could run for office. Many were excluded, including Baathists, former regime officials, etc.
Predictably, a coalition of Iraqi groups dominated by Shiia interests prevailed and appointed a Shiia Prime Minister. Predictably, this coalition had close ties with Shiia neighbor Iran, whose interests are often diametrically opposed to those of the U.S.
Predictably, conflict emerged between Iraqi Shiia interests and Sunni interests, often resulting in violence, approaching, if not meeting Civil War proportions.
Predictably, the U.S. has grown impatient and unhappy with the Shiia-dominated Prime Minister and the overall government of Iraq. The Iraqi Constitution, which as vetted and approved by the U.S. intentionally weakens the power of any segment of Iraqi society and produces gridlock and inability to solve problems caused by the natural divisions in Iraqi Society. This now causes problems for American interests, which have increasingly suffered because of strife, violence and warring within the segments of Iraqi society that were apparent to informed persons from Day One.
The Prime Minister is weak, and predisposed to align with Shiia and even with Iranian interests. This makes him a target for removal by the same U.S. government which arranged for the elections to put him in power. There should be no doubt that American policy makers are attempting to discern how to change the regime in Baghdad in order to increase the perception of Iraqi government complicity with U.S. interests. Both the Democratic and Republican Parties in the U.S. are more concerned with the perception and realization of American interests in Iraq than with the actual realization of the interests of the American people.
It seems unlikely that a violent coup will remove the current Prime Minister of Iraq, but anything is possible. At the minimum, the U.S. is attempting to contrive political if not violent means to change the regime in Baghdad in order to preserve some level of American public support for American involvement in Iraq. This involvement benefits the corporate-dominated American government, and not the American people at large or the Iraqi people.