Fact x Importance = News: The Stories We're Watching

Top Story of the Day: Hillary or Nicolas?

Nope, it's not Senator Clinton, who may or may not be the next Secretary of State.

Nor is it the Global Financial Summit --- yet. Although President Bush welcomed the guests last night, the serious talkin' doesn't start until today. And even then, given the relatively low profile the US will have --- the Bush Administration is almost paralysed, and the Obama folks have chosen to stay in the background --- it will be up to the Europeans to make the running.

No, the surprise headline for this morning is the rocket that French President Nicolas Sarkozy sent to Washington. Or, rather, the US missiles that he is trying to hand back to President Bush.

In talks with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, Sarkozy "joined Russia in condemning the Pentagon's plans to install missile defence bases in central Europe yesterday and backed President Dmitri Medvedev's previously ignored calls for a new pan-European security pact".

The New York Times spectacularly misses the significance, somehow deciding that it lies in "Russia Backs Off on Europe Missile Threat". Russia's feint at putting missiles on its western borders was a political manoeuvre, and to the extent that it has brought Sarkozy away from (or reinforced his existing opposition to) US missile defence, it's worked.

The French President's statement isn't a detachment of Europe from the US. His proposal is that the Organization for Security Cooperation in Europe, to which both Russia and the US belong, discuss the security pact next summer.

It is, however, a distancing of France from not only missile defence but the US-preferred attempt to expand NATO's reach. That is going to prompt an immediate tangle between France and governments such as Czechoslovakia, which are still clinging to the US missile defence plan, but I suspect Sarkozy is looking to Germany for backing. And I think --- with a smile --- that will put a marker down for British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

All in all, the timing of Sarkozy's announcement should add a bit of political spice to the financial talks in the US today.

Under-noticed Story of the Day: Food rather than Rockets

The sad ritual is again being played out on the Israel-Gaza border. The Israelis have made tank raids across the border, and Palestianian groups have lobbed rockets into southern Israel. The Israelis send out their Government spokesmen and, as few US and British media outlets will speak to a Hamas representative, the narrative of Tel Aviv standing firm against Hamas-backed terror gets another paragraph.

The far-from-insignificant story behind the story is the effects of the Israeli blockade on Gaza. On Wednesday, Juan Cole highlighted a UN report that it is running out of food to distribute in the besieged area. The Washington Post in cautious terms --- "residents are warning of a humanitarian crisis because Israel has sealed the territory's borders" --- has now picked up on this, but it is The Independent of London that highlights the impact:

The Israeli blockade of Gaza has led to a steady rise in chronic malnutrition among the 1.5 million people living in the strip, according to a leaked report from the Red Cross.

Speculation of the Day: Obama and Gitmo

William Glaberson in the New York Times pens the analysis that Barack Obama's "pledge to close the detention center is bringing to the fore thorny questions under consideration by his advisers". Significantly, however, this is no comment from the Obama camp.

Adam Cohen in the NewYork Times has a more substantial development. Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, in my opinion one of the most honourable men in Congress, is not going to let President Obama rest in indecision on issues such as Camp X-Ray, surveillance, and other civil rights issues:

Mr. Feingold has been compiling a list of areas for the next president to focus on, which he intends to present to Mr. Obama. It includes amending the Patriot Act, giving detainees greater legal protections and banning torture, cruelty and degrading treatment. He wants to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to restore limits on domestic spying. And he wants to roll back the Bush administration's dedication to classifying government documents.

Negotiation of the Week: Talks with the Taliban?

As violence escalates in Afghanistan, The Independent of London reported on Thursday: "The Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, will today brief Gordon Brown on talks being held with the Taliban with the aim of ending the conflict in his country."

This is a continuing development. Karzai and the Pakistani Government are now pressing the option of discussions with the "moderate" Taliban. Western governments are not necessarily averse to the idea, with US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates saying it should be considered. However, with the Bush Administration in a no-win position --- it gets no credit if talks eventually succeed under an Obama-led effort and it takes the rap if the discussions collapse before 20 January --- this story will be carried forward by folks outside the US.

Russia to Obama: The Follow-Up

The Associated Press reports that Russian President Dmitry Medvedev called Barack Obama on Saturday to offer his congratulations on the President-elect's victory. Apparently, Medvedev
"expressed [his] determination to create constructive and positive interaction for the good of global stability and development", as the US and Russia shared responsibility to address "serious problems of a global nature."

So, three days after laying down a challenge with the declaration that Russia would put missiles on its western borders if the US proceeded with missile defence bases in Poland, Medvedev extends an olive branch. Significance?

First of all, the AP's information came from the Kremlin. So the Russian President's call was part of a calculated public strategy. Having talked tough in the 24 hours after the election, Moscow now offers partnership. Not, however, from a position of weakness or following an American lead but from a stance of equality.

Second, not a word from the Obama camp. Nothing.

That's not surprising. After all, Obama doesn't take office for more than two months, so he's not supposed to be making US foreign policy. He has also shown the trait of playing it cool when under pressure, inside and outside the Presidential campaign.

That, however, leads us to third: there is no reference to the current US President in the story. The Bush Administration is now in the past as far as US-Russian relations are concerned. Sure, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov --- in Egypt, of all places --- for 80 minutes yesterday. As the short report --- so short that it only merited a place in "World in Brief" in the Washington Post --- noted, "Despite the length of the private meeting, there was no sign either side had budged on its position on the most contentious issues."

So, if you following the US-Russian dynamic, hold your breath. Hold it for a long time, because Washington is effectively stalled until January.

Russia to Obama: Ball's In Your Court

In a nationally televised address on Wednesday, Russian President Dmitri Medvedev greeted the President-elect with the message that, if the Obama Administration proceeded with the development of missile defence sites in eastern Europe, the Russians would deploy short-range missiles in Kaliningrad, a Russian enclave between Poland and Lithuania.

The US and British media framed Medvedev's statement as a "brisk warning", "a warning shot", and "chilling words". The New York Times tut-tutted, "Mr. Medvedev and his power-broker-mentor Mr. [Vladimir] Putin seem to be more interested in talking tough and drawing lines in the sand than in exploring Mr. Obama’s intentions."

David Clark, who heads the Russia Foundation thinktank, defined the headlines: "The missile deployment is all of a piece with Russia planting its flag in the Arctic and [former president Vladimir] Putin going hunting bare-chested in Siberia, to, at the other end of the spectrum, active military operations in the Caucasus."

The reaction, whether in panicked headlines or calmer analysis, is incomplete to the point of being unhelpful. For the Russian leadership was not reacting to Obama's plans but to those of his predecessor. A quick reminder: it's the Bush Administration that had been putting the challenge with its pursuit of the missile defence bases, manned by American troops, in Poland and Czechoslovakia. This, in turn, has been part of a wider political-military initiative, including American attempts to get Georgia and Ukraine into NATO. Bush and his advisors, however, left Obama with the burden of a half-completed project. The bases have not yet been established, and the attempt at NATO expansion collapsed spectacularly with the Russian-Georgian conflict in August.

So Moscow, far from facing an American fait accompli, has a window for a counter-move. Medvedev and Putin could have hung back, waiting for a signal from the President-elect. Instead, possibly judging that the Bush Administration in its last days would press ahead with the base plan, possibly judging that Obama isn't clear on his own position, the Russians have chosen to press the issue.

It's a logical step which deserves a more considered analysis than the New York Times' demand that "they stop trying to bully their own people — and everyone else". The Washington Post's simplistic exposition that "Moscow Alarms East More Than West" , with its undertone of sensible New Europe, empty-headed Old Europe, does not get to grips with the US challenge to Russia in its former sphere of influence and, more specifically, the summer shake-up caused by Georgia's ill-fated challenge to Moscow.

Indeed, Russia could exploit this week's revelations that Georgia used far more cluster bombs in South Ossetia than was previously thought. It could note that Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili is facing street protests challenging his rule. Most importantly, it could make its latest move with the knowledge that the US Government, far from being on the front foot in its global ambitions, will be facing immediate economic challenges.

In that context, it was telling that there was no reaction from President Bush to the Medvedev speech; the White House spokesman merely offered the non sequitur, ""We have made it clear that missile defense is designed to protect us all from rogue states."

What was even more telling, however, was President-elect Obama's response to this first foreign-policy challenge. How many references to Russia in his 19-minute press conference yesterday? None.