The first reaction of observers from the US Senate, Western governments and nervous politicians in neighbouring India to the outcome of Pakistan's parliamentary elections was relief. The vote was credible, legitimate and a significant landmark in returning the country to democracy. The moderate majority of the people expressed their desire for change. This has been accepted by President Musharraf, despite the huge setback to his political authority. Notwithstanding sporadic incidents of intimidation, there was no systematic attempt to rig the vote. The violence and suicide bombings that marked the start of the campaign, and almost sabotaged the entire election, did not dampen the stoic determination of millions of voters to make their voice heard.

Democracy, however, is far from entrenched. The election raises questions that must be resolved if the vote is to be respected. The first is the position of President Musharraf. He has brought much of the odium and turmoil of the past six months on his own head through his ill-judged attempts to bypass the courts and political establishment in prolonging his rule. His brief imposition of military rule was a fatal miscalculation that turned the middle class and millions of moderates against him, damaged his standing abroad and, in the end, forced him reluctantly to doff his army uniform. But recent statements have shown a more realistic assessment. His insistence that he will work with whichever government emerges suggests that he understands the change in the power balance. If he has any role now, it is to maintain Pakistan's standing abroad, guarantee continuity and act as a ceremonial civilian head of state.

Whether he will be permitted to salvage even this from his rout may be doubtful. The faction of the Pakistan Muslim League that supported him has been reduced to a few dozen seats, with most of his former Cabinet defeated. The faction that remained loyal to the former Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif, will press for the President's impeachment. Such a move, if supported by the victorious Pakistan People's Party, would be disastrous, reopening old wounds, prolonging the parliamentary point-scoring irrelevant to Pakistan's urgent needs and likely to invite renewed military intervention.

The second pressing issue is the formation of a stable government. Despite an electoral alliance of convenience, there is little love lost between the two main parties. Neither has a workable majority. Each relied heavily on tribal and regional loyalties - the Bhutto clan in Sindh and Mr Sharif in Punjab - and neither seems able to subordinate personal ambition to a credible programme for Pakistan's development. Neither Asif Ali Zardari, Benazir Bhutto's widower, nor Mr Sharif is popular or free of the taint of corruption. Unless a neutral, technocratic figure emerges, coalition talks could swiftly founder.

What the politicians must realise is that they have a mandate: to focus on development, the limping educational system, legal and social reform, detente with India, terrorism and a tough stance against separatism and religious extremism. The Islamists were the big losers of the election. That welcome result will ensure global support for Pakistan's return to democracy. It must not be frittered away by renewed bickering.