Why did Bil'am 'go' and not flee, as instructed by Balak?
Oznayim la'Torah: Because, after hearing from Bil'am that Mo'av would only fall to Yisrael in the distant future, his anger abated and Bil'am no longer needed to escape. Perhaps one can add that he liked Bil'am's plan - which enabled Mo'av to parcipate in the postponement, thereby repairing their broken relationship.
Why does the Torah use a different expression in connection with Balak ("Halach le'Darko") than it does in connection with Bil'am ("Vayashav li'Mekomo")?
Targum Yonasan: Because Balak didn't just go home; he set up the daughters of Midyan 1 in shops (and taverns - Targum Yonasan in Pasuk 2) by the cross-roads from Beis-ha'Yeshimos up to Mount Chermon, in which they sold flax at cut-prices, acting upon the advice of Bil'am ha'Rasha'. 2
Oznayim la'Torah: The Torah writes by Balak "le'Darko" - and not "le'Malchuso" implying that he did not return to his position as king, a. because he failed to stop Bil'am from blessing Yisrael instead of cursing them, and b. because, now that Bil'am had prophesied that Mo'av would only fall into the hands of Yisrael in the time of Mashi'ach, they had no more need of him as king. 3
See Oznayim la'Torah citing Chazal who equate the word "Derech" with Z'nus.
See also Ba'al ha'Turim.
Refer to 23:18:3:1*. Nether of these reasons explains why the Torah does not write ?Vayashav li?Mekomo??