It is no secret that the current wave of pro-democracy demonstrations across the Arab world have shaken the foundations of not only every tyrant’s fortress, but also the foundations of leading foreign policy doctrines. This tug-of-war, which has always existed between values such as human rights and democratic freedoms vs. the calculated interests of realist foreign policy, has rarely received such an existential test, and as such we are beginning to see just how insufficient our definitions of interests and values may be. There have been many precedents. It is no longer logically plausible for a given dictator to cast aside those who disagree with the government as “foreign agents,” whether it is Gaddafi’s imaginary hallucinogenic Al-Qaeda, Hugo Chavez’s constant Yankee invasion fantasy, or Vladimir Putin’s “scavenging jackals” of the color revolutions. The good news is that we are beginning to have real debates about the international law dimensions of violence used against protesters, not only with the progress of the ICC case in Kenya, but also the initiation of a probe into Libya. However, lest the optimists get carried away with their dreams of overnight transitions to democracy, the determination of Col. Muammar Gaddafi to cling to power no matter what the human cost has created a situation demanding more than just the passive applause in the West in favor of the Arab Spring. Confusion and lack of clarity and vision has ensued. In this vacuum of international leadership, Washington appears extremely reluctant to make a wrong decision, leading at least some observers to question whether or not President Barack Obama has any history of courage. Europe has not been much better. Although France has been instrumental in supporting and organizing the Libya intervention, there still seems to be an identity crisis. This is not aided by Sarkozy’s strategy to fend off domestic issues from the extreme right by working up his anti-immigrant (anti-Muslim) rhetoric. Germany’s complicated abstention from the UN Security Council vote was not helpful in projecting what its new foreign policy vision would be for other citizens struggling for freedom in the region.