On a day of dashed hopes in Egypt, the administration’s attempts to balance the democratic aspirations of the protesters against a fear of contributing to broader instability in the Middle East collided head-on with Mr. Mubarak’s defiant refusal to relinquish his office.  To some extent, Mr. Mubarak opened the door for President Obama to appeal even more directly to the protesters, some of whom have felt betrayed by the administration’s cautious approach, saying it placed strategic interests ahead of democratic values. In his speech, Mr. Mubarak said he would not brook foreign interference, suggesting that he was digging in his heels after days of prodding by the United States for “immediate, irreversible” change.  Mr. Obama’s remarks earlier in the day, in which he celebrated the hopes of a “young generation” of Egyptians, were broadcast in Cairo, drawing cheers from the protesters.  “The administration has to put everything on the line now,” said Thomas Malinowski, the Washington director of Human Rights Watch, who has been among several outside experts advising the White House on Egypt in recent days. “Whatever cards they have, this is the time to play them.”  In its first reaction, the administration offered few overt signs of a change in policy. While criticizing the move as insufficient, it made no direct call for Mr. Mubarak’s resignation. But in a statement, the White House called on his government to explain “in clear and unambiguous language” how a transition of power would take place.  Mr. Obama watched Mr. Mubarak’s speech on board Air Force One, returning from a trip to Michigan, the press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said. As soon as he arrived at the White House, Mr. Obama huddled with his national security aides. The administration appeared as taken aback by Mr. Mubarak’s speech as the crowds in Tahrir Square. The director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Leon E. Panetta, testified before the House of Representatives on Thursday morning that there was a “strong likelihood” that Mr. Mubarak would step down by the end of the day.  American officials said Mr. Panetta was basing his statement not on secret intelligence but on media broadcasts, which began circulating before he sat down before the House Intelligence Committee. But a senior administration official said Mr. Obama had also expected that Egypt was on the cusp of dramatic change. Speaking at Northern Michigan University in Marquette, he said, “We are witnessing history unfold,” adding, “America will do everything we can to support an orderly and genuine transition to democracy.”  The chaotic events on Thursday called much of the administration’s strategy in dealing with the Egyptian crisis into question. For days, the administration has pinned its hopes on a transition process managed by the Egyptian vice president, Omar Suleiman. But Mr. Suleiman followed Mr. Mubarak on television, aligning himself squarely with his boss, urging the protesters to decamp, go back to work and stop watching foreign satellite TV channels. That extravagant show of loyalty may doom any chances for Mr. Suleiman to function as an honest broker in the transition — something on which the administration had been counting, in part because it has good relations with Mr. Suleiman, a former head of Egyptian intelligence.  “The administration had been looking toward Suleiman to handle the orderly part of the orderly transition,” said Martin S. Indyk, the director of foreign policy at the Brookings Institution. “But this week, he raised doubts about whether he had made the conversion to a democrat. And now Mubarak has dragged Suleiman down with him, in the eyes of the protesters.”  For the administration, as for the crowds, it was a day of keen anticipation, followed by intense confusion. CNN was on in offices across Washington, with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and other officials waiting for a speech that they believed would be a major step forward in the crisis.  Shortly after the speech, Egypt’s ambassador to Washington, Sameh Shoukry, said he called the White House to say that Mr. Mubarak had in fact delegated his powers to Mr. Suleiman — a move that was hardly clear in a lengthy address that focused more on his refusal to be ousted.  “He now has all the authorities bestowed on the president by the Constitution,” Mr. Shoukry said of Mr. Suleiman in an interview, including command of the military. Mr. Mubarak, the ambassador said, retains the power to amend the Constitution, dissolve Parliament and dismiss the cabinet. And Mr. Mubarak could always take power back.  Defending Mr. Suleiman, Mr. Shoukry said, “The vice president’s statements indicated his desire to fulfill the reform process and continue the dialogue with the opposition.”  Mr. Panetta’s rather firm declaration to Congress about Mr. Mubarak’s exit came at an awkward moment. American officials said Mr. Obama was unhappy about some of the recent judgments of American spy agencies, in particular the conclusion that President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia would remain in power and that Tunisian security forces would come to his defense.  Defending the C.I.A.’s work on Thursday, Mr. Panetta said that the agency last year issued nearly 400 reports about simmering tensions in the Middle East, and the “potential for disruption.” Mr. Panetta compared the difficulty of making intelligence judgments to forecasting earthquakes: even mapping the fault lines cannot give you precise information about the next earthquake.  Still, Mr. Panetta said that his agency needed to better understand the “triggers” that can set off events like the protests in Egypt. He said that he had asked C.I.A. station chiefs for “better collection on issues like popular sentiments, issues like the strength of the opposition, issues like what is the role of the Internet in that particular country” and similar topics.  Speaking to the same House panel, the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper, gave spy agencies a grade of “B-plus, if not A-minus” for their recent Middle East forecasting. But, he cautioned, “We are not clairvoyant.”
The Obama administration can choose to break decisively with President Hosni Mubarak or stick to its call for an âorderly transitionâ that may no longer be tenable.