For months, President Bush and his top advisers have seen this week’s transfer of Iraqi sovereignty as a crucial turning point in the effort to create a functioning democracy in the country long brutalized and subjugated by Saddam Hussein.

By secretly moving up the date by 48 hours, they prevented insurgents from trying to stop the transfer. Iraqi officials took their oaths of office, and U.S. administrator Paul Bremer left the country.

But even the administration doesn’t expect the transfer to halt the violence that has prompted widespread public doubt about whether it can achieve its ultimate goal. Maintaining security will require the indefinite presence of 138,000 U.S. troops, and they will remain a highly visible target for enemies of the fledgling regime.

From a political standpoint, however, conditions in Iraq in October are likely to have more impact on the November election than immediate events this week. A quiet October will do a lot more to re-elect Bush than Monday’s successful transfer.

That means that the president still has more than three months for the new regime to take hold and for U.S. forces to ease the unstable security situation.

The president portrayed the turnover in glowing terms, declaring that, “After decades of brutal rule by a terror regime, the Iraqi people have their country back.”

But those comments ignored the fact that, even for some supporters of his goals, the transfer is more symbolic than real.

“We’re turning over sovereignty, but we’re not turning over any capacity in terms of being able to govern,” noted Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee.

He warned that the administration’s mistakes have made it less likely that its goals can be met. They include failure to plan for the kind of insurgency that has confronted U.S. troops, unwillingness to do what was needed to attract more financial help and personnel from other countries and the decision to fight both the war and the postwar violence with fewer troops than were needed.

Just back from Iraq, Biden told reporters several days before the transfer that, based on conversations with U.S. military and civilian officials, several factors gave him pause:

l The United States has neither enough troops nor the right mix, including an insufficient number of trained military police. It will need extra troops at key points such as elections planned for January, perhaps by overlapping those coming into the country with those who are leaving.

l Increasing signs that U.S. forces will pull back into more readily defensible positions to cut the number of U.S. casualties could create a dangerous vacuum, given the administration’s inability to recruit personnel from other countries and the lack of more than a small number of trained Iraqi security forces.

l Plans for training Iraqi military and security forces are inadequate, both in terms of screening those who will get the training and the time allocated for trainees, though last weekend’s agreement for training assistance from NATO countries should help.

In one sense, the turnover comes at a good time for Bush. Recent polls show that a growing number of Americans see the entire Iraqi venture as a mistake so that anything that makes it look more successful can’t help but bolster his position.

The June 30 transfer date was clearly set in hopes of providing time to make a tranquil October more likely.

On the other hand, Bush could be creating more problems for himself by continuing to paint a rosy Iraqi scenario. Most analysts believe the security situation requires maintenance of the full U.S. force until at least the end of 2005, when an elected government is scheduled to take full control.

And the administration continues to lowball the costs. The Congressional Budget Office says U.S. operations in Iraq next year will cost from $55 billion to $60 billion, more than double the $25 billion Bush has sought so far.

Still, if this week’s transfer takes root and leads to a more favorable outlook this fall, it will prove to be good news for Iraq and for Bush.

Carl P. Leubsdorf is Washington bureau chief of the Dallas Morning News