President Bush’s goodwill tour of Europe this week properly interested both the left and right of American politics. Through obvious symbols, the White House has signaled that it wants to begin a new relationship with Europe while at the same time maintaining its view that the United States has as its mission the spread of democracy through a means that it decides. It is a difficult balance, which the administration has begun to recognize with the careful presentation this week.

The fact that the president had gone on this tour at all should please liberals and Republican internationalists. The isolationist right should be satisfied by the fact that a lot of the tour was show, and that the president conceded only the smallest ground. Reticent Euro-peans may have sensed this or they may merely be waiting for more evidence that comments about “Old Europe” and Freedom Fries are no longer part of Washington’s vocabulary.

The president himself pointed to the symbolism – his first overseas meeting was with NATO in Brussels; his first dinner of the trip was with French President Jacques Chirac – demonstrating that he understood belittling Europe was not a productive strategy. In fact, there is so much common ground between the United States and Europe that the leaders could have spent the visit reviewing what they agreed on without ever getting to difficult topics such as Iraq, Iran and climate change.

More, there’s no reason for President Bush to minimize real differences where they exist. What was unacceptable was his administration’s apparent dismissal of longtime American partners over his determination to go to war against Saddam Hussein. The president is famous for not admitting to error; his tour this week is as close as he is likely to come to suggesting his earlier policy was wrong. Europeans, though skeptical, seemed relieved.

The largest surprise came at the end of the tour. After Mr. Bush had scolded Russian President Vladimir Putin for his retreat from democracy, the two jointly announced an agreement in which their countries would cooperate more “to counter one of the gravest threats our two countries face, nuclear terrorism.” This announcement came just after Reuters reported that Russia would sign a deal with Tehran to help Iran start up its first nuclear power plant. The Bush administration believes Iran has been secretly enriching uranium not for a power plant but for nuclear weapons. Reuters reported that Mr. Putin did not approve his country’s support for the $1 billion Russian-built reactor until, he said, he was sure that Tehran did not plan to make nuclear arms.

This agreement between Russia and Iran is an unexpected test for the United States and Europe. Can they work together to provide the right set of incentives and penalties to prevent Iran from developing these weapons; can they share information that would improve their understanding of Tehran’s nuclear capability; can they work with Russia to further this end?

President Bush made a start in an area far from where he is comfortable. The Europeans seemed to accept that, suggesting that some of these pressing questions now have a better chance of being answered diplomatically.