Cairo's Freedom Train, Part 2

I'm finding it hard to leave the TV these days. Things are moving so fast in Egypt that one hour can make a big difference.
One thing that is more and more clear is that if the United States is going to take positive action instead of limiting its response to the Egyptian freedom movement, it will be Hillary Clinton who is on point and not President Obama.

The President seems to have chosen the method of telephone calls during photo ops in the Oval Office.
Mrs. Clinton is speaking out and also making the phone calls to redouble the message.

Her efforts yesterday seem to have had some influence because the Egyptian vice president and military leader has apologized for last night's violence from supposedly governmental entities, and he has now begun investigations of the former interior minister and some other Mubarak appointees. He has frozen their passports, which means they are now trapped in Egypt during the investigations.
I find it rather comforting that she is the point person, because Secretary Clinton has been out and around in the world for many years and has made a lot of friends, including many in the Middle East. And, while he is not visibly on the scene yet, Bill Clinton's Global Initiative has only served to heighten his popularity in the Arab world, and as anyone who has ever tried to get anything accomplished in the Middle East knows, friendship and family ties count for everything. So, Hillary should use Bill as much as politely possible in the cause of Egyptian liberty.
Hillary Clinton is working against an unpredictable timetable. The velocity of Egyptian events is accelerating, and tomorrow is Friday, which means prayer day for Muslims and a chance for them to plan together the next steps, both pro and con change.
As I suggested yesterday, it would be wrong, in my opinion, for the United States to be timid in the face of the overwhelming Egyptian demand for liberty. The rest of the Middle East will not desert us - because they depend on us for their own protection - from terrorism, from Iran, from Syria and its satellites. And, to be practical, if we don't continue buy so much oil, who will pick up the slack? No one, and that would mean that they could no longer afford to "pay" their citizens to be happy and accept non-democratic regimes.
If the United States gets out in front and leads the way forward, the entire Middle East will follow, not into American-style democracies, but into more moderate nations whose stability is built on a compact between the governed and the leadership. John Locke understood that it is not possible to suppress people forever. The Soviet Union failed for just that reason - no one was willing to support the regime when it was in danger of collapse. So it collapsed, and in a startlingly short time. This is the position the Middle East is in today.
The Middle East is inevitably moving in the direction of a more reasonable compact between the government and the governed. The United States can only win by leading the way, discreetly but energetically. To side with the regressive past will only serve to isolate us from the future of the region and serve to enhance the possibility of extremist groups assuming power. 
And, while Mrs. Clinton is working on all the other Middle East problems on her plate, she ought to be in serious dialogue with Israel about the future. While Israelis are afraid that more freedom in the region will compromise their future, they are wrong. A moderate and peaceful Middle East will heighten the possibility of Israel assuming its rightful place in the region.