Why Not Talk?

George W. Bush likes his briefings short and concise, so it was somewhat unusual when the President requested some particularly verbose reading material aboard Air Force One last week. Rather than peruse another dry policy paper, Bush was more interested in a rambling 18-page polemic that, among other things, argued that U.S. policies do not comport with Christian values. It came from an unlikely correspondent: Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose incendiary statements and nuclear ambitions have raised alarm around the world--and may yet draw the U.S. to the precipice of war.

Nearly three decades had passed since the leaders of Iran and the U.S. communicated directly. Was the missive, punctuated though it was with diatribes against Israel and condemnations of U.S. policy, a signal that Iran wanted to step back from the brink? "All prophets speak of peace and tranquility--based on monotheism, justice and respect for human dignity," Ahmadinejad wrote. "Do you not think that if all of us abide by these principles, we can overcome the world's problems? Will you not accept this invitation?"

How Bush answers may well determine whether the dispute over Iran's nuclear program can be defused before it escalates into a full-blown confrontation. The U.S. has largely ruled out direct engagement with Tehran, choosing instead to threaten Iran with action by the U.N. Security Council if the regime refuses to abandon its suspect nuclear activities. The Iranians, meanwhile, have repeatedly dismissed the Security Council and insisted on their right to enrich uranium, which can be used for peaceful purposes but is also the first step on the path to the Bomb. The U.S. says Tehran's obstinacy is reason to take punitive steps against Iran. But with the two sides slouching toward a showdown, a growing chorus of foreign-policy mandarins from both parties is pushing Bush to make the Iranians a more dramatic offer: face-to-face negotiations. "I don't understand why we are not exercising all of our diplomatic options with Iran, and that begins with talking," says Senator Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican. "Diplomacy is about talking."

There are some indications that the Iranians may be looking for a face-saving way out. The Ahmadinejad letter was preceded by a separate, more pragmatic overture: an "open letter" submitted to TIME and published on TIME.com from Iran's former top nuclear negotiator, who is now a senior adviser to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatullah Ali Khamenei. The piece lays out a multistep plan to resolve the nuclear standoff. Officially, the Bush Administration rejected Tehran's purported attempts to start a direct dialogue. "It's not a serious diplomatic overture," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said. Instead, Washington signed on last week to a European-backed package of proposed incentives and penalties for Iran, aimed at winning the support of Russia and China, which have veto power on the Security Council. But U.S. officials concede that they still haven't persuaded those countries to agree to impose sanctions if Iran fails to comply, leaving the allies with few remaining options for resolving the impasse diplomatically. That's why, in private, some European leaders, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, are urging Bush to sit down with the Iranians. Without direct talks, says a senior German official, "it's very difficult to imagine a solution to the crisis."

1. Most Obnoxious Tourists? The French
2. Your Laptop's Dirty Little Secret
3. Does Osama bin Laden Still Matter?
4. Can General Motors Recover?
5. Does Green Tea Help the Heart?
6. Disabled Models: A UK Reality TV Hit
7. A Brief History Of Competitive Eating
8. US Allowed Korean Mass Executions
9. Mark Twain: Our Original Superstar
10. Mopping Up the CO2 Deluge