It's a matter of perspective, as well, as to what is "nonviolent". The southern Shiite region is considered mostly relatively stable, but much of that is because Moqtada al Sadr's Mahdi Army is running things. Yeah, there's not much sectarian strife when these guys just barge into classrooms and behead uppity teachers in front of their students, as happened recently in Ramadi. Problem solved!
I would hazard a serious guess that this will be the next huge cause for concern. The only area that is considered stable in the report are the three Kurdish provinces. They are quietly getting their act together, securing their oil fields, preparing to generate income, getting their own military units stocked with their ethnic peshmerga fighters.
They are not going to want to share their oil wealth with the rest of the country. At some point, they are going to secede, involving Turkey and Iran. Then all hell will break loose.
But at least the Iraqi Kurds will have freedom, right?
And American fatalities are declining because there is already a de facto level of disengagement in some of the most violent areas. We have decided there is simply nothing we can do in those areas, and it's probably true. Still, this is a problem entirely of our creation, and the consequences of pulling out for good will be a sectarian bloodbath.
Translation: Junior hasn't had anyone read it to him yet. He's too busy plotting his next fuck-up in Iran (more on that later).
Read the whole report. Notice that even in provinces listed at governmentally "stable", such as Najaf and Karbala, the report expresses concern at inreasing levels of influence and association with the Iranian government. Gee, if only someone could have foreseen such a problem....