Washington ? ould the path that will eventually lead the United States out of Iraq pass through the West African jungles of Liberia? This unlikely question is worth exploring in the wake of a surprisingly productive White House meeting on Monday between President Bush and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

Four months after Bush’s decision to invade Iraq seemed to signal a new ice age in U.S. relations with the United Nations, there are now glimmers of hope for cooperation — both on ending Liberia’s vicious civil war and on devising a political process in Iraq that could end the U.S. occupation there.

There are still large obstacles in both cases to such happy endings. Continuing violence in Iraq and lingering distrust within the Bush administration of a strong political role for the U.N. in that country make finding common ground on Iraq particularly tricky.

But Bush and Annan made a start in that direction, according to two authoritative accounts of the meeting. The president gave Annan head-of-state treatment in the Oval Office and leaned forward on Liberia, while the secretary-general tried to send the message that an increased U.N. role in Iraq would not be turned into a loss of face for Washington, and should not be seen that way.

By the standard of what remains to be done, these are only small beginning steps: Bush remains convinced that the United Nations must be drastically overhauled to deal with the new threats of global terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. Annan remains committed to evolutionary change in an organization that he personifies and of which he is a product.

But those stark contrasts in vision make the areas of understanding the two leaders reached on Monday all the more remarkable. I wouldn’t bet the farm on how far they will get — there is a limit even to my optimism on this — but the good will both showed should be pursued and made as operational as possible.

On Liberia, that means marrying Annan’s desire to have U.S. troops lend credibility and power to peacekeeping operations to Bush’s need for a clear exit strategy. The stumbling block has been President Charles Taylor’s refusal to step down. Bush says Taylor must go before U.S. troops will go into Liberia.

The outline of action discussed in the Oval Office calls for a vanguard force of 1,000 to 2,000 West African troops assembled by the Economic Community of West African States, or ECOWAS, to go to Monrovia and bring Taylor out. A small U.S. contingent would then accompany a larger ECOWAS force to secure the capital, and would be relieved in short order by U.N. peacekeepers. “You won’t get bogged down,” Annan promised.

A successful mission in Liberia could never serve as an exact model for Iraq. But it could serve as a confidence-building measure between Washington and the world body, which ultimately will play a major role in extending recognition and support to the new Iraqi government that will emerge from U.S. occupation.

Annan’s representative, Sergio Vieira de Mello, has shrewdly supported the decision by U.S. administrator Paul Bremer to appoint an Iraqi Governing Council as the forerunner of a new government in Baghdad. A three-member delegation will seek in New York on Tuesday to occupy Iraq’s U.N. seat in an important initial test of international acceptance.

Iraq’s Arab neighbors have been lukewarm to a formal U.N. blessing for a delegation that is committed to democracy, but they are not expected to cross Washington on this. And critics of the war such as France are set to welcome the delegation being seated as a step that moves political power away from the United States and toward Iraqis.

Annan told me after seeing Bush that the U.N. can help provide what is most needed in Iraq now: “A clear political vision of how the political process can be handled.”

He would like to see U.N. involvement in holding an Iraqi census and then in registering voters for a national election that might be as little as a year away. These practical steps “could help take some of the heat off” U.S. forces and administrators, Annan added.

Others say that Bush and Annan steered clear of the contentious issue of whether a new U.N. resolution should set out an expanded U.N. role in Iraq and clear the way for other nations to contribute peacekeeping forces to the U.S.-led coalition.

That is an unnecessary argument at this point. Power is beginning to flow to Iraqis, as Bush promised it would, and they will eventually define the U.N. role in their country. That is the goal Bush and Annan should pursue in the pragmatic mode they established on Monday.