On Sunday, the people of Iraq go to the polls. Nick Morrison looks at whether this is the start of a democratic revolution in the Middle East - or the prelude to chaos and civil war.

MILLIONS of ballot papers have been printed, around 19,000 candidates have come forward to stand for election, 5,000 polling stations have been prepared and around 300,000 US, British and Iraqi forces are at the ready. The only thing missing is the voters.

It is turn-out that will determine the success or otherwise of Sunday's poll. More specifically, it is turn-out among Iraq's Sunni population. Whether the vote proves to be a milestone in Iraq's transition from dictatorship to democracy, or it unleashes a new wave of terror, culminating in a country torn apart by civil war, hinges on whether the result carries any legitimacy with this key minority.

The latest polls suggest between 60-80 per cent of the electorate are planning to cast their vote, but the crucial test will be whether that is the right 80 per cent.

Although they make up only 20 per cent of Iraq's 26 million people, Sunni Muslims have ruled the country for the last 80 years, the last 30 through Saddam Hussein's Baath Party.

The knowledge that this domination will come to an end in a democratic Iraq, where Shia Muslims comprise 60 per cent of the population, has fuelled Sunni hostility towards the poll. The major Sunni parties have snubbed the poll, claiming the threat of violence is too great, and some radical clerics have urged Sunnis not to cast their votes. Insurgents dedicated to disrupting the poll have also targeted the Sunni heartland, north and west of Baghdad.

The fear is that if these tactics work, and turn-out among Sunnis is low and few Sunni candidates are elected, it will merely bolster feelings of resentment among the Sunnis and lead to increased support for the insurgents.

The interim government is so concerned that it is considering options including reserving a certain number of seats in the national assembly for Sunnis, to ensure they have fair representation, but whether this would be enough to quell hostility towards the poll is doubtful.

The stakes are high. The vote is an important test of President Bush's mission to spread democracy in the Middle East, and his hope of creating a stable Iraq. So crucial is the poll, that the interim government has defied calls to suspend it, despite mounting violence which is threatening to make it one of the bloodiest elections in history.

Candidates, campaign workers and polling stations have been targeted by the insurgents, who have delivered stark warnings to the country's 14 million voters. In some cities, posters have been pasted up, showing a headless body with its thumb covered in ink - a sign the victim has voted.

Campaigning has largely been limited to posters and TV advertisements, although with most people going without electricity most of the time this may have had little impact. Few candidates are prepared to appear in public, and some have even kept their identities secret for fear of retribution.

To try and limit the violence, Iraq's land borders are being closed from tomorrow, aiming to prevent an influx of foreign-based militants, vehicles will only be allowed on the roads if they have a permit, and existing curfews are being extended. The election period has been declared a three-day public holiday, with shops and offices closing.

It is still unclear if voting will be possible at all in major areas including Fallujah, Mosul, Tikrit and Ramadi, with problems expected in Baghdad. In the British and European-administered south, months of calm have given way to sporadic attacks, with terrorists believed to be preparing to attack Shia Muslims, who have largely been enthusiastic about the vote.

But important though the vote is, it is by no means clear that it will be a defining moment for Iraq. The crucial issue is not so much the creation of democratic structures, which will be the principal task of the new National Assembly, but providing security. And without Sunni support, this is likely to elude an incoming government.

If the new administration has no authority among the Sunnis, then the insurgency will continue and Iraq will head towards anarchy not democracy.

For the US, a stable government is the precursor to the withdrawal of the 150,000 American troops stationed in Iraq, but for some, the presence of foreign troops fuels the insurgency. The alternative, a precipitate withdrawal, runs the risk of plunging Iraq into civil war, just as when the British left India in 1948.

This scenario could see the Shias in the south, the Sunnis in the centre and the Kurds in the north all establishing their separate states, creating further instability in a region already dangerously volatile.

But even if this is averted, Sunday's vote will be just a staging post in Iraq's history. It will not end the violence, nor will it guarantee stability. Instead, it is another waymarker in an attempt to introduce democracy into a country which has no democratic tradition. The question now is, whether that proves to be a marker on the way to order, or to chaos.