Since 1998 every president has had a statutory mandate to advance international religious freedom as part of U.S. foreign policy. Hampered by State Department foot dragging, neither the Clinton nor the Bush administration compiled much of a record in this area. This has left a considerable opportunity for the Obamites but -- perhaps unsurprisingly -- there is little sign that the Hilary Clinton State Department is taking religious liberty any more seriously than its predecessors. Not yet, at least.

In his June 4 Cairo speech, President Obama correctly identified religious freedom as one of the "sources of tension" between the U.S. and Muslim-majority countries, and even mentioned Egypt's Coptic minority. Moreover, this section of the speech followed one on democracy, a sequence that at least permitted the inference that the two -- religious freedom and democracy -- are linked in the President's mind. But my friends at Foggy Bottom tell me there is no sign of diplomatic follow through on either issue.

And, while many other senior State positions have been filled, the post of Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom has not. When it comes, however, that nomination will tell us a great deal about the administration's intentions. If the ambassasor is someone with a seminary degree (or the equivalent) but no foreign policy experience, that may signal a greater desire to shore up a domestic constituency than to advance religious freedom abroad.