Iraq is now busy counting ballots. Election day was nowhere near as bloody as Al-Zarqawi had said it would be. No doubt there were many who stayed at home out of fear but fortunately, there were many more who wanted their voices heard and so they voted. How many actually voted will not be known for several days, but indications are that the turnout has been relatively high — even in areas where it was feared there might be boycotts. So many conditions for a free and democratic election are lacking in present-day Iraq which is why many have been moved to declare victory by arguing that if Iraqis are voting after years of Saddam’s brutalities and after months of a bloody insurgency, that is in fact success.

And this is true. Being brave enough to vote when there is a distinct chance of not returning home is genuine patriotic heroism that fortunately very few people in very few countries are called upon to emulate.

There is no certainty of course that the elections themselves will produce stability. It is important to note, though, that the election is not for a fully constitutional government so it was never intended to be the final word on the democratization of Iraq. The election will choose a transitional assembly which will function for less than a year and, as such, will be unable to stabilize the situation completely. More time will be needed. This is only the first step in the beginning of a shift in the political system of the country. The election is little more than an interim stage rather than the definitive move toward democracy, as of course was originally hoped.

The hope had been that by now the insurgency would be all but over and that politics would prevail. It has not worked out like that. What we have instead is areas in which murderous anarchy is all too common.

We also have a phenomenon, billed as the country’s first free election in half a century. This is why many people believe the elections will prove a milestone. As Iraqis went to the polls, it seemed the question was whether the election was surreal. The nation almost had to close down for the vote, guarded by US and Iraqi forces, curfews, sealed borders and the shutting down of its international airport — all the while fearing suicide attacks and explosions at polling stations.

Was it really better than no election at all? We think so. We welcome the elections. It surely had flaws — but what election doesn’t? All the people may not have spoken. The threatened Sunni boycott may result in an assembly where Sunni representation will be much below what it should be. But a great number had their say. Those who become members of the assembly and form the government will do so on the strength of a mandate given by the people of Iraq. This is what we have been waiting for — not appointments but an election by and for the people in which the people choose. It is what so many all over the world have died for and that should not be forgotten.