As Libya Burns, Obama Fiddles

Democracy: As the flames of freedom sweep Libya, longtime dictator Moammar Gadhafi's days look to be numbered. With the outcome still uncertain, a question arises: Why is the U.S. sitting on its hands?

The Obama administration's approach to yet another revolt in an Arab country seems weirdly passive, as if sitting on the sidelines and watching was a policy. It's not.

People are being butchered in the streets of Libya — as many as 400 at last count. Libya's diplomatic corps has resigned en masse in protest. But so far, the White House has managed only tepid remarks in condemnation of Gadhafi's murderous crackdown.

In a written statement last Friday, President Obama lumped Libya and two other Arab countries together, urging "restraint." Apart from that, he has said next to nothing as the Mideast boils over.

"We join the international community in strongly condemning the violence in Libya," said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Not exactly Winston Churchill.

Not surprisingly, Libyans want something stronger. "I want the U.S. to tell the world and to work with the countries who love peace . .. they have to stop this," said Libya's ambassador to the U.S., Ali Ojli. The Obama administration, he said, should "take a strong position that what's happening in Libya must be stopped now."

Yet Obama seems frozen, afraid to speak or even be seen taking any sides in these revolts. He seems happy to let the United Nations — which to this day keeps Libya on its Human Rights Commission even as it murders its own citizens — take the lead.

This is a huge mistake. Many people who have taken to the streets in places such as Egypt, Yemen, Tunisia and Libya want democracy and human rights to prevail. They look to the U.S. for support, but find none.

The same administration that goes into high dudgeon over West Bank settlements by Israel, our best ally in the Mideast, can't rouse itself to influence the change now breaking out in the Muslim world.

A lot's at stake. Popular revolts in country after country may lead not to democracy, but to a wave of repressive, despotic Islamic fundamentalism. A strong response now from Obama would at least put the U.S. on record as supporting a democratic outcome — and may even influence it.

But so far, none has come, which has been the problem all along with Obama's Mideast policy.

Last summer, as democratic protests erupted in Iran, the U.S. stayed silent — giving Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's regime a pass as it crushed demonstrations. Obama was likewise nowhere to be seen as Egypt melted down, keeping quiet as a 30-year ally, Hosni Mubarak, was pushed from power. Turkey, proudly secular for nearly a century, is turning toward radical Islam. If the U.S. has a policy for that, we're unaware of it.

America's abdication of responsibility as the world's only superpower leaves a dangerous power vacuum in the Mideast. If we do nothing, say nothing and have no coherent policy, Iran's ruling mullahs and the radical Muslim Brotherhood will fill it.