The only thing missing from President Bush’s giddy embrace of the new Iraqi government in the Rose Garden on Tuesday was the “Mission Accomplished” banner.

But the claim of success in putting Iraq on the road to democracy is no less premature than the president’s hasty declaration of the end of combat from the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln a year ago.

Iraq desperately needs two things: an Iraqi government that has legitimacy in the eyes of its people and can provide security in daily life. Neither are likely soon.

The new interim government is a step up the legitimacy ladder from the widely discredited Iraqi Governing Council installed by the American occupation authority. It includes some fresh faces, a large contingent of women and technocrats in key areas. It also deliberately excludes Islamist political forces in favor of more secular elements.

United Nations envoy Lakhdar Brahimi deserves credit for engaging a wide swath of Iraqi society. His stated goal was to form an independent government, dominated by nonpolitical figures, that would have the credibility to oversee elections by January 2005.

Unfortunately, Brahimi acquiesced to the creation of a government that looks too much like the old one. It may be fatally contaminated by its close association with an American agenda.

The administration is not really ready to hand over “full sovereignty” in Iraq. “A nominal turnover of sovereignty to Iraq on June 30 actually cloaks plans for continuing U.S. control of the military, key elements of the economy and even oil policy,” says longtime former CIA Middle East analyst Graham Fuller.

The United States and Britain have drafted a U.N. resolution to define the authority of the new government. Even after redrafting to respond to criticism that it was too vague, it allows a continued American military presence until early 2006 and does not spell out Iraqi control over security issues.

The murky process of naming the new government reveals the same unwillingness to yield control. Brahimi was set to name Hussain Sharistani as prime minister. A former nuclear physicist who refused to work in Saddam Hussein’s nuclear bomb program, he was a perfect choice to stand above the fray. And he had the added benefit of being close to Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the moderate Shiite cleric whose word can determine the legitimacy of a government for many Iraqis.

Instead the Governing Council, with the backing of some U.S. officials, pre-empted the process by nominating Ayad Allawi as their candidate. Allawi is a Shiite, but his roots are in the Baath Socialist Party. He broke with Saddam and went into exile in the late 1970s, where he was closely tied to British intelligence and the CIA.

Brahimi’s choice for president was also blocked. Senior government posts went to groups — the Kurds, Shiite political parties and others — who have been part of the Governing Council.

“This is a classic, power-sharing, divide-the-spoils government,” says a former senior American occupation adviser who was in Baghdad until recently. “All the major power factions on the governing council got something.” The only person left out of the game was the controversial Pentagon favorite, Ahmed Chalabi, now dogged by accusations of ties to Iran.

Bush tried to portray this as all Brahimi’s work. But critics point a finger at the White House, whose own man, Ambassador Robert Blackwill, has been on the scene.

“Blackwill came to Iraq in April with a plan to basically hand over the interim government to the Governing Council,” says the former American adviser. “This is now what has happened.”

U.N. officials carefully chose their words. Allawi was on Brahimi’s list, and he got the green light from Ayatollah Sistani for the selection, a U.N. senior official told me. But Brahimi also emphasized that power rests in American hands — he pointedly described the American occupation head as “the dictator of Iraq.”

Brahimi’s somber tone was in sharp contrast to Bush’s celebration. While defending the interim government, he made it clear that real legitimacy can come only when Iraqis select their own government through elections. If Iraq can make it that far, then it may be time to talk about missions being accomplished.

Daniel Sneider is foreign affairs columnist for the San Jose Mercury News.