consistent policy toward the arab spring, but i wanted to ask, should he? there are vast differences between the circumstances on the ground in tunisia, egypt, libya, saudi arabia, between american interests in those countries and our capacity to influence events there. some places are more stable, the regimes are more reformist, others are not. should we have a one-size-fits-all foreign policy? take the case where american interests and values most starkly collide saudi arabia. will the administration start clamoring for regime change in riyadh, and would that encourage large-scale protests and instability within the kingdom, the price of oil would skyrocket. meanwhile, the saudi regime which has legitimacy, power and lots of cash that it is spending, would likely endure, only now it would be enraged at washington. so what exactly would a more consistent middle eastern policy achieve? in libya, the administration continue fronted a potential humanitarian crisis that could