WACO – President Bush is accelerating his move to the middle on foreign policy, cheering Democrats, angering some Republicans and shaking up the presidential campaign.

In just the past two days, Mr. Bush sent his first high-level emissary to sit down with Iran, agreed for the first time to set a "time horizon" for withdrawing troops from Iraq, and authorized Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to join North Korean diplomats at six-party talks about ending that country's nuclear weapons program.

The maneuvers underscore how much the Bush administration has changed since 2002, when he proclaimed Iran and North Korea to be part of an "axis of evil."

Many Democrats view the developments as evidence that Mr. Bush is moving closer to military and diplomatic policies that their party's presumptive presidential nominee, Sen. Barack Obama, has long advocated.

But the steps could also help the likely GOP nominee, Sen. John McCain, some analysts said, since he can now voice support for pulling out U.S. troops without appearing disloyal to the president.

Mr. Bush's moves have agitated conservatives, including some former administration officials, who believe that he has abandoned principles set forth during his first term to embrace a more accommodating posture pushed by Dr. Rice and her supporters.

John Bolton, a former U.N. ambassador for Mr. Bush who has become one of his most vocal conservative critics, likened the developments to breaches in a dam that is about to burst.

"Once the collapse begins, adversaries have a real opportunity to gain advantage," he said Saturday. "In terms of the Bush presidency, this many reversals this close to the end destroys credibility. ... It appears there is no depth to which this administration will not sink in its last days."

Former White House Middle East director Flynt Leverett, who has accused the administration of being too hawkish, said the moves on Iraq, Iran and North Korea were signs of "tactical desperation. It's a recognition that if they don't make these moves they'll be left with nothing."

White House officials bristle at such criticisms, saying that partisans on both sides have misinterpreted tactical decisions as policy changes.

Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the administration's National Security Council, said Saturday that the moves were "fruits of the diplomatic labor that we've been engaged in in the last couple of years."

"The actions that we've taken this week are all tactical moves brought about by the overarching strategy that the president has put in place," he added.

One of the administration's most surprising shifts came in regards to Iran. The White House has repeatedly refused to engage directly with Tehran until the Islamic republic stops its work toward enriching uranium.

Yet Undersecretary of State William Burns joined other foreign envoys in Geneva on Saturday as they met with Iran's top nuclear negotiator.

U.S. officials have said the decision to send Mr. Burns was intended to further unify the international coalition that has formed in opposition to Iran's nuclear work. Those nations have offered a package of economic, political and security incentives to Iran if it halts uranium enrichment and agrees to begin negotiations on the matter.

European envoy Javier Solana told reporters that the talks were inconclusive and that Iran needed to give a more definitive answer to the offer within two weeks. Iranian negotiator Saeed Jalili described the talks as "constructive and progressing."

U.S. officials privately suggested that the Iranians were flummoxed by Mr. Burns' presence.

"They clearly were not able to get their act together to give an answer," one official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. "I think we have the Iranians on the back foot."

On Iraq, the White House joined Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Friday in announcing an agreement to set "aspirational" goals for a U.S. troop drawdown. It marked a significant new posture for Mr. Bush, who often ridiculed Democratic proposals for what he described as "artificial" timetables.

Mr. Johndroe and other White House officials said the agreement is consistent with Mr. Bush's long-held requirement that any withdrawals from Iraq be based on security conditions. Those have improved markedly this year in part because of a temporary increase in the number of troops, whose stay in Iraq is now coming to an end.

But administration officials also acknowledge that the agreement was necessary because of growing Iraqi pressure for a withdrawal timeline.

As talks started on Iran's nuclear ambitions, one Iranian official told reporters there was "no chance" his country would suspend its uranium enrichment program. But later, Iran's top negotiator was noncommittal. He called the negotiating process a "very beautiful endeavor" and said he hoped the result eventually would be "beautiful to behold."

In Iraq, the largest Sunni political bloc rejoined the government Saturday after a nearly yearlong boycott. It was widely seen as a victory for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite who has portrayed himself as uninfluenced by sectarian pressures.

From wire reports