Change may be the word he made his own during the election campaign but President Barack Obama's uncertain and timid response to the Iran protests suggests he views it as a slogan with little application beyond America's shores. Full Story »
Posted by Derek Hawkins
Contrasts Obama's Realpolitik approach to Iran with the idealistic language of his Cairo speech at the beginning of the month. All around a decent analysis, but oversimplifies some points, like Obama's statement about the similarities between Ahmadinejad and Moussavi -- policy-wise they are demonstrably similar.
Careful to avoid what he said could be seen in Iran as “meddling” or “moralising”, Mr Obama has tried to maintain a restrained, neutral stance, brushing aside the advice of Vice President Joe Biden, who in off-the-record comments has been forcefully advocating a full-throated endorsement of the protesters. Instead, Mr Obama has played the foreign policy realist – notwithstanding his idealistic rhetoric in Cairo.
It seems increasingly obvious to me that what we're really seeing here is genuine naivete on Obama's part. His inexperience on the global stage shines through every time he reexplains his position on Iran. In this case, I think the president would have been wise to take the muzzle off Joe Biden, who, according to some Beltway press, has called for stronger advocacy of the reform movement.