WASHINGTON -- ON the eve of war two years ago, President Bush said a democratic regime in Iraq "would serve as a dramatic and inspiring example for other nations in the region." Since then, there have been elections in Afghanistan and among the Palestinians that, along with the prospect of self-rule in Iraq, have stirred ripples of reform and hope in parts of the Middle East.

But today, as Iraqis vote in their first modern election, the war in Iraq is also transforming the Middle East and its relations with the United States in directions the Bush administration might not have expected.

Even many of the region's skeptics about the war say Iraq might, in the end, build a relatively stable democracy. But some of America's most steadfast allies, knowing how shaky their own hold on power is, fear that the Iraqi insurgency may encourage violent anti-government dissidents or Islamic militants in their own countries.

Among many ordinary Arabs, moreover, Iraq's example also has been more alarming than inspiring. Whatever hopes these citizens have for democracy, they have started to wonder if Iraq has paid a high price to get there by first descending into violence, sectarian strife and greater susceptibility to those who preach hatred of the United States.

Two questions are on their minds: Even if democracy takes root and grows in Iraq, will a more stable Middle East follow? And if civil war consumes Iraq, how quickly will instability engulf its neighbors?

"We had the power to reshuffle the deck of cards in the Middle East," said Shibley Telhami, the Anwar Sadat professor for peace and development at the University of Maryland. "But we never had the power to make sure how they would fall."

Beyond the general concern about instability is a shared concern in Sunni-ruled countries - Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the smaller oil-rich states of the Persian Gulf - that the greatest beneficiary of the war so far has been not Iraq, but Shiite-dominated Iran. Empowering Iraq's Shiite majority, they fear, will embolden Shiites elsewhere to challenge their own ruling Sunni Muslim classes. This, in turn, could encourage a spread of Iranian influence that was held in check by Iraq when it was ruled by Sunni kings and dictators.

Jordan's ruler, King Abdullah II, traveled to Washington recently to express the fears of the region's Sunni majority that an arc of Shiite influence could soon extend from Iran through Iraq to Iran's ally Syria and to Syria's puppet, Lebanon.

Bush administration officials have been pleading with Arab leaders not to overreact to such fears; a senior State Department official dismissed the king's comments recently as "racist anti-Shiite paranoia." But this official acknowledged that such fears have spread through the Arab world, and an Iraqi who has advised the State Department went further, suggesting that they could prompt Jordan and Saudi Arabia - and some elements in Syria - to let Sunni insurgents in Iraq be supported from their territory.

"The Sunnis in Iraq may make up only 20 percent of the population, but they are a skilled minority that has strategic depth among Iraq's neighbors," the former adviser said, referring to Iraq's Sunni Arabs (but not to its Kurds, who are also Sunni Muslims). "Support from Jordan and Saudi Arabia is a force multiplier for them."

Iraq's Shiite leaders, who have been among the most enthusiastic supporters of the election today, have steadfastly maintained that a pluralist democracy, not Iran's theocracy, is their model for government, and Iran itself has tacitly blessed their approach. Nevertheless, the war strengthened Iran's position in the region by removing its worst enemy, Saddam Hussein, and whatever new regime takes hold in Iraq is likely to have friendly ties to Tehran.

Iran has also been making a big investment of resources in the social welfare, religious and political institutions of Iraq's Shiites. "There is only one country that is really doing nation-building in Iraq, and it isn't the United States," said an Arab diplomat sardonically. "It's Iran."

By Steven R. Weisman
New York Times