High turnout in the recent Iraqi election is fueling hope that stability in the war-torn country may not be far off. But the challenges Iraq faces are still considerable. In a Spiegel Online interview, Iraq expert Brian Katulis warns that the country must act decisively to ensure its own future before the United States finishes its planned withdrawal in 2011.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Initial reports on the parliamentary elections in Iraq have been encouraging. Sixty-two percent of the electorate cast their ballots. This is slightly lower than it was in 2005 but, given the recent spate of violence, still significant. Was Sunday a good day for Iraq's democracy?

Brian Katulis: Election Day was a very good day for Iraq. The real test will come in the coming months. For Iraq's democracy to take real root, the country's leaders need to move forward on resolving power-sharing disputes and protecting the rights of all citizens, especially religious minorities, such as Christians, who have faced tremendous persecution in many parts of the country.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Final election results are not expected for several days, if not weeks. Is it likely that a potential election cliffhanger could lead to more violence?

Katulis: Uncertainty about the elections could fuel more tensions on the ground. Since the country has been flooded with weapons over the past six years - with many of them going to militias and other groups outside of the Iraqi security forces - a danger exists that some political groups might try to use these weapons to settle political scores. But I doubt violence would return to (the level it was at during) the ugly days of Iraq's civil war, in 2006 and 2007. How the Iraqi security forces, including certain divisions of the Iraqi army, react to the election results is something many Iraq-watchers are monitoring.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: A lot will depend on the willingness of the election's losers to accept its results. How do you think people will react if the election is contested? Former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, who seems to be trailing current Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, has already indicated he would accuse the other side of fraud.

Katulis: In many early elections in countries undergoing political transitions, various parties and candidates dispute the legitimacy of the results. So, I'm not surprised by early complaints, and I suspect there will be many more to come. The question is whether Iraq's institutions, including the electoral commission and the judiciary, deal with such complaints in a transparent and efficient manner.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Will the new divide between Shiites, who mostly voted for Maliki, and Sunnis, who largely backed Allawi, exacerbate divisions within the country?

Katulis: Iraq remains a deeply divided country along key ethnic and sectarian lines, and Iraq's political transition has been stalled for much of the past five years. The major issues over sharing power remain unresolved. The most positive development is that the environment in the country has created greater incentives for more Iraqi factions to join the political system and turn away from violence. But this doesn't mean that the political system has resolved the fundamental disputes that divide the key Iraqi factions.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: To what extent did disputes like the as-yet-undetermined allocation of oil resources and the power struggle in the resource-rich northern, Kurdish part of the country play a role in the campaign?

Katulis: These larger issues, which are linked to major internal disputes, were not as high of a priority as issues closer to voters, such as law and order and basic services. For the most part, most leading Iraqi factions did not present any grand solutions on the major issues that remain unresolved in Iraq's constitution.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: The outcome of the results is also being seen as a litmus test for the U.S. strategy in Iraq. Will the Americans stick to their initial withdrawal plans, that is, to get combat troops out by the end of August and all others by the end of 2011?

Katulis: The Obama administration remains committed to implementing a phased strategic redeployment of its forces from Iraq. Iraqis have been reasserting their sovereignty for several years now, and they want to continue to regain control of their country. I think it is unlikely that we will see any major changes to the schedule outlined in the 2008 security agreement signed by the Iraqi government and the Bush administration. Any such change to the schedule should begin with a request from the Iraqi government, and the Obama administration would have to evaluate such a request in light of other national security priorities.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: What do you make of suggestions made by some American experts on Iraq that the U.S.  should keep up to 50,000 troops in Iraq? Would the U.S. or Iraqi public ever support such an arrangement?

Katulis: These suggestions are mostly aimed at getting a little bit of press attention for the analyst who makes them. It's nice fodder for media debates, but it won't fundamentally shape policy choices of the Iraqi government and the Obama administration. Iraqi leaders have an increasingly strong incentive to assert control over their country's affairs. The continued transition won't be easy or violence-free, but there is a strong desire among many Iraqi people to regain control. Too many Americans, particularly those in the punditry class, have projected their own arguments, wishes, dreams, hopes and fears on the Iraqi people for far too long. As we saw in previous wars, it is hard for some Americans - particularly those who favored or facilitated the continuation of the war in their work - to just simply let go.