President Obama’s noted cool and nonchalance may reassure some, but his clear aversion to unexpected drama is a hindrance to confronting a dangerous crisis effectively. In fact, his overly passive response to events in Iran reveals a regrettable unwillingness to speak up that could easily be mistaken by foreign leaders for weakness. As Iranians took to the streets against their oppressive regime following the disputed June 12 elections, Obama said nothing substantive for more than a week. At first, he justified his passivity by arguing that America would otherwise be perceived as meddling in Iranian affairs. Predictably, though, the Iranian Mullahs still accused the U.S. of meddling despite Obama’s silence.

The president does in fact have a serious reason to speak very carefully – Iran’s nuclear program. Obama promised during the 2008 presidential campaign to meet with Iranian leaders “without precondition” in order to discuss that topic. Administration officials were quoted last week fearful that open U.S. encouragement of freedom-loving Iranians could derail these negotiations — negotiations that are “a nearly theological preoccupation” for Obama, former UN Ambassador John Bolton told The Examiner during an editorial board meeting yesterday.