Does Obama have any strategy at all on the Arab uprisings?

The White House insisted that it wasn’t being slow, but prudent, because it was eager to get Americans — potential hostages — out of the country before doing anything provocative. That sounded more like a rationalization than an explanation. Far more Americans were in Egypt during its turmoil, and there was no hint that the White House was concerned. The presence of thousands of Europeans in Libya didn’t keep their leaders from offering forceful and clear condemnations. The most unfathomable part: Obama’s reaction made it seem as if America was more eager to oust a 30-year ally than do the same to a 40-year enemy, whose cruelty dwarfs anything we saw from Mubarak. Harshness toward friends and conciliation toward enemies is an indecipherable policy from any angle.

Another oddity, particularly given Obama’s high regard for the power of his own rhetoric, is that you’d think he’d be looking for ways to take credit for, and guide, the forces of reform in the region. Some of his defenders have tried to make the case that Obama’s famous Cairo speech in 2009 fueled this year’s “Arab Spring.” That would be more plausible if Obama weren’t in a defensive crouch.