Amid widespread, lingering misgivings and under a cloud of terrorist threats and attacks, the Iraqi election was finally held on January 30 as scheduled. 

Despite the ceaseless activities of the insurgents and a smattering of imperfections in the democratic process, no one can possibly deny the election was successful and champions the freedom that democracy brings.

The smooth election, the final results of which will be released in the next few days, is an encouraging and significant event in the violence-ravaged country.

Since its full independence from British rule, Iraq had experienced several bloody coup d'etats until the Arab Socialist Baath Party (the Baath) came to power in 1968, which then enjoyed a 36-year-long reign in the country.

However, the Middle East country had never before held a democratic election involving other parties and political factions.

The first of its kind, last Sunday's election attracted 75 independent candidates from 27 parties and nine alliances -- all carrying different political proposals to contest the country's temporary president and the seats in the Transitional National Assembly and the interim government.

This act of democracy is completely different from the ruthless oligarchy of former president Saddam Hussein's 36-year-long rule.

The election is expected to provide Iraqis with different political choices. A brand new mechanism, characterized as equitable competition, mutual restriction and power balance among the elected leadership, is expected to reflect -- to the maximum -- the mainstream opinions of the masses of Iraqis and serve their fundamental interests.

Never before in known history has Iraq carried out reasonable distribution of state power and interests according to the population's proportional wishes. The Sunni Muslims, which accounts for 20 percent of the total population, has always ruled the country while the Shi'ite Muslims and Kurds, which respectively take up 60 and 20 percent of the population, have always been kept away from the seat of power.

Such an unreasonable power structure and political model have brewed and aggravated instability and conflicts between different ethnic and religious sects for decades.

In this election, a single constituency system and the representative proportion system were adopted nationwide. This governmental mechanism is designed to bring more people into the decision making process.

Such an earthshaking change not only matches Iraq's national condition, but also follows the historical trend of the world's political democratization.

Although Sunni Muslims stayed away from the polling stations, some of its political parties and groups still actively participated in this election.

More importantly, Shi'ite, Kurdish, Christian and secular groups, which account for 80 percent of the country's population, actively took part in the election.

Some people cast great doubt over the election, citing it as an event contrived under the occupation of American troops.

No doubt the United States did serve as the director of the Iraq election. But the actors on and off the stage are mainly Iraqis.

The Iraq War is illegitimate. But the reality in the wake of the war has already been recognized by the United Nations Security Council in the form of its relevant resolutions, including the country's political process.

If the authority of the UN Security Council, which sets out to maintain world peace and security, and the legal status of its resolutions are to be observed, people should not hold a suspicious attitude towards the legitimacy of the election backed by the world body.

Even the Sunni political parties that did not take part in polling admitted that the election is in the fundamental interests of Iraqis. A successful election will not only help ease conflicts among a forest of political factions in the country but also will avoid deepening the rift between them.

To ensure its fairness, the UN dispatched 128 observers, and various Iraqi parties and groups organized 23,000 superintendents to monitor the process of the election.

These measures basically guaranteed the fairness and transparency of the election.

But it would be impractical and infeasible to demand that Iraqis ensure complete fairness and transparency of the election under the current situation.

The election was held at the time when Iraq is still plagued by a worsening security situation, and thus its timing has caused widespread controversies.

Given that the United States has transferred nominal sovereignty to Iraq and the country needs to build its own legislative and administrative systems, the election is a key and necessary step towards this end.

Its realization will help rebuild Iraq's own security forces, accelerate the withdrawal of the US-led foreign coalition troops, and reduce violence and terrorists activities.

Also, the holding of the election as scheduled, an important part of Iraq's postwar reconstruction, signals a significant step towards stability. It will help the country eliminate the soil brewing various hostile forces, thus benefiting its restoration from decades of war and disturbances to peace and stability.

It will take days to garner the accurate election turnout, but it is an unchangeable fact that Shi'ites will become Iraq's leading players in the country's politics.

The rise of the Shi'ites in Iraq may possibly cause a domino effect in other Middle East countries.

This smooth election will not lead to the immediate pull-out of American troops from Iraq, although several political parties and groups of the country have said they will push for a timetable for their withdrawal.

US President George W. Bush also reaffirmed that whether or how long the United States would keep its military presence in Iraq is to be decided by the Iraqi government. But he would not easily give up the new Middle East bridgehead the United States seized through a military war.

In the eyes of the Bush administration, Iraq serves as a springboard for US strategic deployment in the Middle East, including its "democratic reform" of the region and control of the region's petroleum supply lines.

Given the current security situation and its weak military and security forces, the Iraqi government also does not expect an immediate withdrawal of American troops.

The election does not mean Iraq has established a consolidated new regime that can put the country's restive situation under control without the intervention of the United States.

It is most likely that the new Iraqi interim government will negotiate with the United States a definite timetable for the cutting of and subsequent pull-out of the US-led foreign troops. But the United States will still keep its military presence in Iraq within a foreseeable period of time.

Also, the election will not immediately end the ongoing chaotic situation in the country.

The two large-scale military assaults launched by the United States against anti-American insurgents in Fallujah have largely weakened the local armed forces.

However, if there are other forces in Iraq hostile to the United States and the country's status quo, and if there is ground for the existence of the extremist religious factions, armed violence in Iraq will not come to a halt.

(China Daily February 4, 2005)