For some days now we’ve been wondering where Sec. of State Hillary Clinton has been on the Iran crisis. She was, for one thing, the most hawkish-sounding Democrat in the 2008 presidential race. She has found her voice now, saying yesterday:

Obviously, they have a huge credibility gap with their own people as to the election process. . . . And I don’t think that’s going to disappear by any finding of a limited review of a relatively-small number of ballots. But clearly, these internal matters are for Iranians themselves to address. And we hope that they will be given the opportunity to do so in a peaceful way that respects the right of expression. And it has been my position and that of our administration that we support the fundamental values of peoples’ voices being heard, their votes being counted. And we’ll have to see how this unfolds.

Is this some cruel joke, or merely an insult? “These internal matters are for Iranians themselves to address;” “we hope they will be given the opportunity to do so in a peaceful way;” “we’ll have to see how this unfolds.” If James Baker had said anything so purblind about Tiananmen, the media and the rest of the country would be demanding his resignation for being so out of touch.

Memo to the Secretary of State: The Iranian people have decided — by the millions they’ve been marching, by the thousands they’ve been getting clubbed, arrested, and beaten. And we are seeing how it unfolds: Those in the government with the guns and riot weapons are using those weapons against those on the streets who don’t have them. It does not take much complicated crisis analysis to realize how things will unfold.

Michael Ledeen, below, gives a good summary of how things will further unfold, not just for the Iranian people but for us. What I’m wondering is at what point will some enterprising young college student write a thesis titled “Why the U.S. Slept.” Perhaps they are doing so now.