Former U.S. President George W. Bush was wrong about many things. His administration wrongly believed Iraq possessed unconventional chemical and biological weapons. President Bush and his advisers also made a wrong call in connecting the 9/11 hijackers — who were primarily Saudi Islamic militants — to the Iraqi government. In fact, the previous U.S. administration seemed to mess up almost everything it attempted. A lack of oversight in the financial world contributed to the mess the American economy is currently in. Unrestrained spending over eight years pushed the U.S. into heavy debt. A bungled response to Hurricane Katrina cost far too many American lives and dented America's reputation. But could it be that when historians sit down to debate the Bush presidency decades from now, their main focus will be to praise the former president for ordering an invasion that indirectly transformed the entire Middle East?

To be fair to George W. Bush's detractors, the stated mission of the Iraq invasion was to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction (WMD). These weapons turned out to be fiction. It is not unfair to say that after it became clear that no such unconventional weaponry existed in Iraq, former President Bush pivoted away from WMDs as a justification for the invasion and begin to emphasize building democracy in the Middle East instead. The former president's supporters will claim that regime change and bringing democracy to Iraq was always part of the reasoning behind toppling Saddam Hussein while Democrats and others will point to this after-the-fact justification with cynicism. Regardless of this debate, however, one less debatable fact is emerging: Iraq is ever so slowly becoming a democratic country. This is not to claim that Iraq has blossomed into a paradise of freedom where rights are respected and people no longer live in fear. Today the situation is still quite tumultuous. Bombings are still killing scores of people, kidnapping militias still prowl the streets and many of Iraq's leaders are so corrupt that they make a mockery of the very concept of government. But despite all of these negatives, shoots of democratic growth are being seen.

Speaking to CNN last week, best-selling author and CNN host Fareed Zakaria argued that the Iraqi parliamentary elections that took place last Sunday mark a watershed for the new Iraq for two reasons. “First, if Iraq is able to achieve some degree of consolidation in terms of its democracy, it will add dramatically to its political stability,” said Zakaria. “And the second is, if Iraq is able to consolidate as a democracy, it will mean there will have been some success in Iraq that we can point to for the vast investment and the vast expenditure of blood and treasure that the United States has put in. I'm not saying that you can make an easy statement that this justifies the invasion, I'm simply saying that there will be a very strong positive outcome in Iraq that will at least be set against the cost.”

There's no way of estimating when Iraq might become a full and genuine democracy on par with say, Germany or Japan. It could take half a century or perhaps even a full century. But ever more it is looking as if the “shock and awe” of invasion was required for progress towards democracy. This logic is of course anathema to many liberal Americans, many of whom believe it is impossible to export democracy and who condemn the United States for its sometimes self-righteous belief that it alone represents “true” democracy. But regardless of one's political philosophy it's hard to argue with results on the ground. In Iraq today, political parties are forming bonds and hashing out a kind of democracy that works for them. It's not perfect — it's not even pretty — but it is the beginnings of a modern democracy.

Those who loathed former President George W. Bush found little about his career to praise. The former U.S. president in some ways stumbled into office after the Supreme Court ruled in his favor in a recount dispute, despite the fact that Bush's Democratic challenger Al Gore had won the popular U.S. vote by over half a million. Bush's time in office was also marked by stumbling, both domestically and overseas. But could it be that George W. Bush will be remembered more for Iraqi democracy than his shortcomings?

Over 4,000 U.S. military personnel as well as hundreds of soldiers from the UK and other nations have lost their lives since operation Iraqi Freedom began in 2003. It's heartening to see indications that history will view these brave fighting men and women as those who made the ultimate sacrifice to bring freedom to Iraq and perhaps eventually the entire region.