President George Bush deserves credit for his administration’s offer to talk directly with Iranian officials about the country’s nuclear program. But while such talks would end a nearly three-decade hiatus of diplomatic relations between the countries, it is not clear that the offer will open the door to renewed diplomacy. Asking for talks is certainly positive, but predicating such talks on Iran’s suspension of uranium enrichment makes it difficult for Tehran to take Washington up on its offer.

At the White House Wednesday, President Bush laid out the United States’ new diplomatic course. “Our message to the Iranians is that, one, you won’t have a weapon, and two, that you must verifiably suspend any programs, at which point we will come to the negotiating table to work on a way forward,” he said.

The focus of the talks would be Iran’s nuclear program, which it says aims to generate power and the Bush administration believes is the country’s attempt to make nuclear weapons. As a condition of talks, the Bush administration has demanded that Iran first halt its program to enrich uranium and reprocess plutonium. This condition requires Iran to surrender in advance on what would be the central issue of any diplomatic talks. How could the two sides discuss a matter that one side already considers settled?

Media in the United States and abroad characterized the proposal as a way to placate European countries upset with the U.S. refusal to meet directly with Iranian officials more than to open a dialogue with Tehran.

Predictably, Iranian officials called the Bush plan “propaganda” and not a “rational solution.” However, Iran’s foreign minister, Manoucher Mottaki, did not outright refuse the offer, which also includes lifting some economic sanctions and supplying nuclear power reactors with tight control on their fuel.

In an odd way, the tentative efforts to build a relationship are encouraging. Last month, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wrote a rambling letter to President Bush suggesting that the two had a lot in common and could gain from dialogue. Although dismissed publicly by the Bush administration, the letter apparently helped soften the administration’s position.

However, it is also possible that the call for talks from Washington is simply a way to check off the diplomacy box before returning to military options for dealing with Iran’s recalcitrance. If Iran rejects the U.S. offer, administration hawks can use that to show that airstrikes or other military attacks are the only solution.

That cannot be allowed to happen. The administration must continue, with support from Congress, to find a way to talk to Iran.