But the political economy of the Greek sovereign debt crisis involves all those concepts that the two-dimensional economics of the past 20 years finds it not only hard to cope with, but distasteful even to discuss: class, communism, Europe's fascist past. Oh, and whether the Euro is going to survive.

The economic crisis has raised a bonfire of the vanities. It floored countries like Iceland and Ireland, where the prosperity and property booms were found to be driven by a financial system that went quickly bust. But Greece is on a different level: it's not the banks that are bust but the country.

The incoming Pasok (Pan-hellenic socialist) government discovered that instead of 3%, or even the revised 6% of GDP, the budget deficit was running to 13%. Somebody had been mis-stating the figures; whole tranches of defence expenditure, for example, seem to have been covered up.

And while a 13% deficit - and a 110% national debt for that matter - are not a disaster for a developed country, they cannot really be sustained in a country where, as my Greek barber puts it, "not paying your taxes is a national sport".

On the streets here, people don't blame the current PASOK government, yet. Young, trendy leftists rail against "global capitalism"; the jaded old guys in the cafes talk about "the octopus" - the political system with a corrupt (they allege) tentacle in every corner of Greek society.

But it's not just successive Greek governments that look culpable. The European Union turned a blind eye to consistent rule breaking. It offered the protection of a single currency and a central bank, without requiring fiscal discipline. Now it is finding out you need more than this to make a currency strong: you need political will.

For just as with Wall Street - where regulators had no idea about the scale of dodgy dealing and little enthusiasm to find out - Brussels has tolerated Greek government rule-flouting, more or less systematically, for the best part of two decades.

Greece was bailed out by the EU in 1987 and reforms were promised, but not delivered. Having scraped into the Eurozone at the height of an economic upturn, Greece has never looked like it could stay within the rules without some massive reform programme that the political system is incapable of delivering.

If Greece were a "true sovereign", with its own currency, that currency would now be the subject of a massive tactical burn by hedge fund speculators, just as Britain's was in 1992. But it is part of the Eurozone. So only the insurance policies on its national debt can be the subject of wild speculation. An 8bn dollar bet has been placed on the collapsing value of the Euro - and as one banker tells Newsnight tonight, it has further to fall.

As George Magnus points out, sovereign debt crises usually need four measures to resolve: devalue the currency, slash interest rates, monetise the debt - by the central bank buying up government debt - and a bailout. Of these only a bailout would be possible for Greece. The Eurozone makes the first two impossible and the third nearly so. So it's bailout or bust.

But here's the problem: the crisis has exposed is the absence of any mechanism for the Eurozone or EU to bail Greece out, and the absence of any collective will among EU finance ministers to do so. After 20 years of failing to force Greece to stick to the EU and Eurozone rules this should not come as a surprise, but it has suddenly struck the markets how weak it makes the Eurozone itself look.

For if Greece were to default, suddenly its bonds could not be accepted by the ECB as collateral. That would cause contagion to other parts of the financial system, because for Greece read also maybe Spain and Portugal. Bankers use government bonds issued by these countries as collateral in deals and suddenly their collateral would be not looking very healthy. It would probably spark a full blown run the debt of all flaky Eurozone countries, in the form of rising real interest rates on government debt and credit default swap movements.

And it would do something else: it would blow apart the strategy of the EU for dealing with the crisis beyond the Eurozone. Latvia, for example, imposing massive austerity as a price for eventually getting into the Eurozone; Iceland, pushing its way up the queue to join the Eurozone; Bosnia, unofficially already using the Euro; Ukraine, with its distant hopes of EU membership; Turkey ditto. Forget all this for a long time.

Suddenly the idea of inviting crisis-wracked countries to join either the EU or the Eurozone would not look very clever, especially to the good burghers of mittel-Europa who had been told for two decades that the whole Euro project was going to place them at the epicentre of world stability and prosperity.

But. Newsflash. Greece to planet earth. Here's the better-than-expected news...

There is, I surmise on the basis of being here 36 hours, zero chance of Greece being forced into default by a mass social movement opposed to the cuts.

It's still possible that the bond markets themselves could force Greece this way - but having spoken face-to-face with left wing student leaders and public sector worker activists, here's what they say:

Their timescale is two years, not two weeks. Even those who do not want this to happen accept that Pasok will basically channel and head-off the anger. I have spoken to a bin-man on 750 euros a month take home pay, facing a 10% pay cut, who says this, and is mad as hell about it, but still prepared to see the Pasok government as a shield against the global markets, not enemy number one.

I've just sat in a village café with local leaders from both Pasok and New Democracy who say they will support the government, painful though it is. But only so far. As one put it, if they force us into deep austerity, we may have to launch a revolution - though it may not be this generation that does it.

For these reasons it's what happens after any bailout that is crucial.

The country has unresolved political fault-lines going back to the Cold War. Among commentators it has become fashionable to affect ignorance of the differences between Eurocommunist and hardline post-Soviet doctrines, or to care about strikes, or to remember who did what to whom in that chaotic period at the end of World War Two. Now these are highly relevant in Greece, a country where a minister can state openly that there are "fascist elements" within his own police force, and where the rival wings of post-Soviet leftism have between them 34 MPs, and hammer and sickle posters plaster some village streets.

The Pasok government of George Papandreou was put into power during the first wave of political reaction to the economic downturn, in 2009. The centre-right New Democracy party, which it now seems mis-stated Greece's financial difficulties, was thrown out in a swing to the left.

The Papandreou government privately briefs that it is the target of a right-wing ideological speculative attack by US and European hedge fund managers and that its deficit reduction plan is sound. The communist-led, trade union movement has rejected the plan as too austere but is currently restrained by the fact that the voting base of Pasok and the left is supportive of Papandreou and does not want to create an opening for the return of the right.

But soon the markets - or an IMF-led bailout, or even a rule-shattering EU-led bailout - will demand tougher measures.

There is a massive public sector workforce here. Its wages have grown rapidly, and out of proportion to any other Eurozone country, 30% since 2006 compared to 10% for the Eurozone, according to figures produced by GFC economist Graham Turner.

These public sector workers will be the big losers in any austerity plan. Staring, plaintively, at a binman's wage slip bearing the grand total of 750 euros takehome, for a month, after 25 years service, brings it home to you. On the same payslip I counted about 400 euros worth of deductions - only 58 of which were actual tax. Direct tax rises will hit such people hard.

If an austerity plan is, eventually, imposed on Athens from outside, either from Washington or Brussels, then the Cold War history of Greece becomes highly relevant.

During the war the German occupiers tried to run the Greek economy from Berlin. Then in December 1944 a different army opened fire on Communist-led demonstrators in Athens, many of whom had been part of the anti-fascist resistance. That was the British Army: together with the USA, and with the approval of the Kremlin, the Brits then disarmed the communists. A year later civil war ensued, between the communists and a monarchist-conservative government. It tore Greece apart.

If it were all just ancient history it would be irrelevant. But if you go into the kafeneions where there are still veterans of that time alive, much of the discussion still revolves around these events. Villages are divided left and right, along lines of a blood feud that is viscerally remembered. And on the farmers' roadblocks that are paralysing northern Greece, where I've been today, they are not ashamed to voice their belief that this is all a plot by America and Britain to ruin the Greek economy. And for Berlin and Brussels they have contempt.

Right now the Greek political class has held together: all except the two left parties in parliament have declared support for the Papandreou austerity plan.

If a harder one is imposed from outside there will be mayhem - and Pasok will most likely (if it follows generations of political form) swing leftwards, leaning on its popular base and refusing to countenance further austerity. To anybody who followed the Argentine crisis of 2002 it's a recogniseable pattern. But Argentina was not in the Eurozone. A default-defying swing to the left would immediately call into question the credibility of the Eurozone, whose rules - at Maastricht, long before the Euro itself was launched - were written to make such swings to the left impossible.

The old fault-lines could persist peacefully in Greece, essentially, because it has been a laid back, highly educated and middlingly prosperous country. If the Eurozone's architects turned a blind eye to this low-tax haven on their southern border it has been because in many ways it has lived the Euro dream: entrepreneurship plus a welfare state; high culture plus flowing football.

To keep the dream alive, it is highly likely that Greece is about to be bailed out, and that the current EU mission to "monitor" Greek economic figures is a precursor to that. But it's the shape of the bailout, the conditions and the social reaction that will prove crucial.

Right now, from where I'm sitting, the Greek crisis looks as follows: the Pasok government will hold, making press speculation about imminent default or social upheaval look overblown - and in the light of the huge bet placed on it in the markets, a little bit cui bono.

But for the young generation they will be queuing up to leave the country: they see the whole thing as the end of a dream: they have only low wages, 27% unemployment, minimal pension rights and a decade of meagre growth to look forward to.

It's the anger of the youth, not strikes like the one that will paralyse this city on Wednesday, that is the real unpredictable factor.

Who were those students seen behind David Cameron on Monday while he made his speech on constitutional matters at the University of East London (UEL)?

"They weren't our students," my source at UEL tells me. "We were puzzled when we saw the pictures on TV because there were so many white faces. Whereas the population of UEL is much more black and Asian."

And I'm also told that when the Student Union President Joseph Bitrus was asked on LBC radio today why the student audience looked so bored with the speech, Mr Bitrus too expressed puzzlement, and said that they weren't his students.

So did the Conservatives bus their students in from somewhere else just to be sure that Mr Cameron's speech got a good reception and there weren't any embarrassing protests?

Indeed, were the audience students at all?

I think we should be told. After all, one of the themes of Mr Cameron's speech was "transparency".

Markets are extraordinary things. Today, someone got on a plane a bit early and the euro rose.

Ok, it wasn't just someone; it was the president of the European Central Bank. He left Australia over concerns the European currency was in dire straits, and Greece would need a bail out. Miraculously the euro rose on news he was heading home. Sweet, really.

Greece - which lies within the Eurozone - needs rescuing pretty badly. Last month, its parliament agreed to cut the country's debt from 13% of GDP to just 3% within three years.

I'm not sure what the Greek is for savage cuts, but I'm pretty sure everyone in Greece does by now.

Will the big beasts of Europe - France and Germany - agree to a costly bailout for Greece, a second tier economy they don't much trust anyway? And is it the beginning of the end of the euro project if they don't?

We have the Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, who has advised the Greek government, and the hedge fund wallah Hugh Hendry to tell us what happens now.

Would you call someone a "queer gayboy faggot" on the way to work? Ok, that was rhetorical, actually. We don't really want to know, but the point being made by the FA in a new video is that the homophobic language of the terraces would sound jaw-dropping if transposed onto the ordinary commute to work.

You won't see this video anywhere else as it has been deemed too blunt to pass muster, but a copy has been leaked to Newsnight.

Tonight we discuss strong ad techniques and sports fan homophobia with a 6'11 gay former NBA star from Manchester.

We also have a film from Iran monitoring the green opposition movement's tactics ahead of Thursday's rally showdown.

Thanks for all those of you who've had a look at my Virtually There diary. We're going to incorporate some of your suggestions into this week's column. No, not the one about scrapping it.

Best wishes,
Emily

Entry from 1107GMT:

Currently our top story is the market pressure on the Euro and the risk of contagion. What can/will Europe do? Is there a lack of will or a lack rules?

As we approach the anniversary of the Iranian revolution this week, Tim Whewell asks what has been happening in the recent period of political unrest and how much of a threat to the government it is. Are we seeing a slow moving revolution or not? He speaks to contributors both inside and outside Iran.

And we are looking at efforts to combat homophobia in football.

More details later.

But John Strafford, of the Campaign for Conservative Democracy, points out that the Tories actually use a similar preferential voting system, a variation on AV, for all their candidate selections and elections of party leaders.

Mischievously, I looked up the voting figures for the Conservative leadership election last time round, in 2005.

Lo and behold, the votes from MPs in the first round were:

David Davis - 62
David Cameron - 56
Liam Fox - 42
Ken Clarke - 38

It was only in subsequent ballots, after the weaker candidates, Mr Clarke and Mr Fox, were eliminated, and David Cameron picked up many of their supporters' second or third preferences, that he won through.

If the Conservatives had used "first past the post" in 2005, then David Davis would have won.

From Emily:

I'm wondering how the world of showbiz feels about David Cameron's claim that politics under Labour has become "a demented branch of the entertainment industry". Is there a Strictly Remortgage show to be done? Not any more, perhaps...

Today, David Cameron laid the blame for the failure of politics firmly at the feet of Gordon Brown, accusing him of "government by initiative, press release, and media management". And, moreover, he pledged we would see it no more under a Cameron government. That'll be worth watching then.

The gloves, at any rate are clearly off. And tonight - as all parties pledge to rid politics of the sleaze of the expenses scandal - we ask why things have suddenly got so personal and if the spirit of politics really can change.

In Afghanistan they are preparing for what is being billed as a major offensive against the Taliban. Our Diplomatic editor Mark Urban will take us through exactly what the surge strategy there will mean. We'll ask what kind of role the British troops hope the Afghans themselves will be playing and why - on the day two more British troops are killed there - the big pre-announcement is not asking for trouble from the insurgents.

The Tories are back with their Swedish models. They want the "free school" system to work here in the UK - which basically means anyone can start a school and run it - and it has to be free and accessible to all. Could it work here? Does it really work in Scandinavia? Michael Gove will be with me in the studio.

The bloggers have already dubbed him Alistair "weepy" Campbell after yesterday's emotional interview with the BBC. But this is the man who said "the only communication that works now really is when people are being utterly authentic". What did he mean by that? Has the stiff upper
lip gone for good. And is authentic the same as truthful?

We'll tread carefully here, but we'll be debating this on the programme tonight.

Join me at 10.30pm on BBC Two.

Emily

PS From the web team: We have launched a new Facebook page. Check it out for updates, best content and previews of what's to come on the programme. If you'd like to give us feedback, or there's anything else you want to see on our page, we want to hear from you at www.facebook.com/bbcnewsnight.

ENTRY FROM 11.54GMT

Michael Crick will be reporting on the three Labour MPs and one Conservative peer who are facing criminal charges over their expenses. David Cameron says the law must be changed to stop them using parliamentary privilege to "evade justice".

Liz MacKean has been to Sweden to visit schools run independently of local council control, a scheme which the Conservatives hope to introduce in England if they win the next election. We'll be asking the shadow secretary of state for children, schools and families, Michael Gove, if they are really such a good idea.

And Mark Urban will be reporting on Operation Moshtarak - an offensive involving thousands of coalition troops designed to force Taliban militants from an area surrounding the town of Marja in Afghanistan's Helmand province. The defence secretary Bob Ainsworth has already warned of likely UK casualties.

More details later.

"As a captain with the team, John Terry has displayed extremely positive behaviour. However, I have to take into account other considerations and what is best for all of the England squad. What is best for all of the England team has inspired my choice." - England boss Fabio Capello.

John Terry has been stripped of the England captaincy following allegations about his private life.

Tonight we will be discussing whether it was the right decision.

Also, the UK's biggest manufacturer and one of the world's biggest defence companies, BAE Systems has reached agreement with fraud investigators on both sides of the Atlantic.

The company will pay the US government a total of a quarter of a billion pounds for conspiring to make false statements.

BAE has admitted to one charge of inadequate accounting in the UK... the fine here is £30m.

Peter Marshall, who has been covering the BAE story for many years for Newsnight, will be reporting live from Washington DC.

And, three Labour MPs and one Tory peer will face criminal charges over their expenses, the Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer has said.

MPs Elliot Morley, Jim Devine, David Chaytor and Lord Hanningfield will be charged under the Theft Act.

All four have said they deny any charges and would defend their positions robustly.

What impact will this dark day in British politics have on the upcoming election and public opinion?

Join Gavin Esler at 10.30pm on BBC Two.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ENTRY FROM 1416GMT

Here are the things we are looking at for tonight's programme:

We are focussing on the news that the Crown Prosecution Service has said that three Labour MPs and one Conservative peer will face criminal charges over their expenses.

We are also across the power-sharing deal in Northern Ireland.

A deal between NI's biggest parties, the DUP and Sinn Fein, could see policing and justice powers devolved to Northern Ireland on 12 April.

More details later.

Despite the party's new branding with aqua, "absolutely no aqua diamonds will be countenanced", he says.

Today, Sir Thomas Legg finally published his audit of MPs' expenses claims between 2004 and 2008.

Sir Thomas has criticised the expenses system, saying it was "deeply flawed" and the rules "vague", and recommended that 390 MPs, more than half, should repay £1.3m.

Tonight, David Grossman will be reporting on the first official examination of the expenses issue.

And ahead of the announcement tomorrow by the Crown Prosecution Service of whether it will prosecute MPs involved in the expenses row, we will ask whether we are now reaching the conclusion of what has been a damaging period for politics and Parliament

Also, in the wake of scandals about the private lives of public figures, Max Mosley and a leading newspaper lawyer will join us in the Newsnight studio to debate privacy and press freedom.

We have a film from our Sydney correspondent Nick Bryant on climate change scepticism in Australia (including footage of the opposition leader in his budgie smugglers).

And Stephen Smith reports on the demise of The Foundry in East London, which is to be demolished and replaced with an 18-storey hotel.

Over the past decade the venue has played an important role in the history of artists including author Irvine Welsh, comic Mark Thomas, graffiti artist Banksy, and band The Libertines.

Is its demolition part of the ebb and flow of city life, or a sign of how we fail to treasure the arts heritage of the future?

Join Gavin Esler at 10.30pm on BBC Two.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENTRY FROM 11.28GMT

Here is what we are planning for tonight's programme:

MPs expenses are back in the headlines following the publication of Sir Thomas Legg's report on the issue.

After reviewing five years of claims, Sir Thomas has recommended that 390 MPs, more than half, should repay £1.3m.

Some MPs say the way Sir Thomas carried out the audit was "sloppy" and £180,000 was cut off the total after appeals.

Tonight, David Grossman reports on the audit conclusions and whether, especially given criticism and appeals from some MPs, the situation is now clear.

We have a film from Sydney correspondent Nick Bryant on climate change scepticism in Australia.

We are also looking at the Bank of England decision to halt quantitative easing, the policy designed to stimulate growth in the economy, and privacy laws versus press freedom.

Also, as Toyota's stream of bad news continues we are looking at how big brands weather such knocks to their reputation.

More details later.

This measure would be mean a reduction from 650 MPs (in the next Parliament) down to about 585.

Sixty-five constituencies would be axed. And 65 more MPs would lose their jobs.

And it is clear that the Conservatives plan to go full speed ahead with this pledge immediately on achieving power.

They know that cutting the number of MPs is likely to prove popular with voters, but many Conservatives also hope that the operation will help the severe unfairness in the electoral system at the moment, which operates against them.

(It is surely absurd that there should be any doubt whether the Tories' current 7-9% lead in the polls would lead to a working majority, when in 2005 Labour got a pretty handsome majority of 64 with a lead of less than 3% in the vote.)

Cutting the number of seats in time for the subsequent election (in 2014 or 2015, assuming the next Parliament runs to a usual term) would mean a new boundary review - just after the new boundaries in England and Wales introduced in time for the coming election.

In particular, the Conservatives plan to bring in two new rules for that boundary review which might help swing the distribution of seats back in their favour.

First, they would legislate to ensure that Parliamentary seats should be much more equal in population.

Second, they will change the convention whereby constituencies do not cross county boundaries.

The latter means that many seats in small English counties such as Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire are unduly large, and so the Tories do not get as many seats as they might.

The main losers from this process are likely to be Labour and the Liberal Democrats, but one leading expert on the process tells me that many Conservative MPs will inevitably lose their jobs as well.

Which is why some Tory MPs are not that pleased with Mr Cameron's pledge to cut the number of MPs, and are getting quite jittery about what will happen when they have to fight against Conservative colleagues for the diminished spoils.

Tonight we speak to financial and political heavy weights who worry that without a European bailout, contagion could spread across the Eurozone and endanger the single currency.

UK forces are likely to operate more closely with France and other European partners in future conflicts, a defence paper on military reform suggested today. Meanwhile Gordon Brown has been attacked in the Commons for ''ignoring the welfare'' of our armed forces.

Mark Urban will examine the uncertain future of British defence and Jeremy will discuss what Britain's global role should be.

Tim Whewell has travelled to Uganda where an attempt to punish "aggravated homosexuality" with the death penalty has led to outrage across the world. What lies behind the homophobic campaign?

And was the outgoing children's commissioner Sir Al Aynsley Green right when he said that 'Britain is one of world's most unfriendly countries towards children'? We'll debate.

Do join Jeremy at 10.30pm on BBC Two.

Tonight Newsnight exposes the problems besetting the very pinnacle of climate change science. Are the warnings about global warming trustworthy or not? Are climate scientists eroding our trust with a series of mistakes, false predictions, and possibly dodgy science?

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is meant to be the gold standard - subject to rigorous peer review and based on hard scientific data, and yet it has made a series of blunders. The IPCC assertion that there is a very high likelihood glaciers in the Himalayas will disappear by 2035 is unsubstantiated by science, and wrong.

The IPCC have now admitted it was "a lapse in standards". But this follows a number of other assertions about the impact of natural disasters and the future of the Amazonian rainforest that now turn out to be controversial. Add to that the now infamous hacked email exchange between scientists about disputed climate change statistics and the failure to deliver a global agreement at Copenhagen, and are we entitled to feel bewildered?

Susan Watts reports on the growing pressure on the IPCC. We'll be discussing it all live with Professor Chris Field of the IPCC - a man at the centre of the storm - and a leading climate scientist with strong criticisms of the IPCC.

And if there are persistent doubts over global warming how does that play into the promises to reduce CO2 emissions? Justin Rowlatt sees the plans for what could be the world's leading Carbon Capture Plant, due to be sited in Yorkshire.

Today Gordon Brown announced plans for a referendum on constitutional change. Today is also officially Groundhog Day. Dear viewer I ask you, are these two things linked? We'll discuss whether the government's plans for a switch to voting for a list of candidates, rather than first past the post, is an election strategy or, after 13 years in power, Gordon Brown's lightbulb moment?

And it's Oscar-tastic with ten films in contention for the big prize rather than five for the first time since 1943 - and what a mix it is! From the Hurt Locker, to Avatar, to Inglourious Basterds.

Watch to see the contenders. 10.30pm on BBC Two.

Kirsty

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FROM 11:31

Here is what we are lining up for tonight's programme:

Susan Watts is looking into the growing pressure on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) after recent claims that some leading scientists exaggerated the melting of the Himalayan glaciers.

At the centre of the controversy is the IPCC's Working Group 2 - whose job it is to assess the impact of human induced climate change.

In fact, according to its own website, Working Group 2 "assesses the scientific, technical, environmental, economic and social aspects of the vulnerability (sensitivity and adaptability) to climate change of, and the negative and positive consequences for, ecological systems, socio-economic sectors and human health, with an emphasis on regional sectoral and cross-sectoral issues".

Tonight, Chris Field, the head of Working Group 2, will be on programme.

We are also looking at Labour's plans to scrap Britain's "first past the post" voting system if it wins the General Election.

And we have a very powerful film from Tim Whewell about homosexuality in Uganda.

Also we will be across the Oscars nominations when they are announced at lunchtime.

Here, I too will admit to having linked back to some earlier pearls of wisdom.

We're less likely to remind people of unsuccessful pieces, but on this occasion I'm going to.

Back on 22nd October last year I wrote a blog about hopes running high for a nuclear breakthrough with Iran.

The story, was based on sources in the International Atomic Energy Authority and the US State Department talking up the chances of Iran accepting a deal.

The idea was that Russia and France would reprocess their enriched uranium into things with civil uses, like medical isotopes, rather than military ones.

Chatting today to Ali Ansari, an Iran expert at the Royal Institute for International Affairs, he pointed out that the US State Department was insisting the offer stood a good chance of success because it, along with the rest of the Obama administration was desperate for a sign that the president's police of engagement was yielding results.

Three months on it has become clear quite how remote the hope of this nuclear offer being accepted were.

Its opponents in Tehran soon shot it down.

The violent aftershocks of June's Iranian presidential elections meanwhile have further poisoned the atmosphere.

Iran has continued with public show trials of democracy activists. These have included claims about US, UK, Zionist and even BBC plots against Iran.

Last week's Afghan conference in London might have given a chance for a resumption of diplomacy, but the Iranian foreign minister did not turn up and the US instead used the margins of the meeting to campaign for new sanctions against Iran.

So the Obama administration's engagement policy has yielded little by way of concessions from President Ahmadinejad and now seems to be mutating into something different, as the US State Department sherpas begin the long painful climb towards a new sanctions regime.

If the policy can be said to have achieved one thing it is that Barack Hussein Obama still does not look like a good fit for the Great Satan cap that Iranian ideologues reserve for the occupant of the White House.

The absence of Bush-style sabre rattling creates a political vacuum that anti-Western Iranians try to fill by linking their pro-democracy countrymen to alleged Western plots.

Where US policy is heading from here is not yet clear.

And given what I wrote back in October, I shall be quite careful before claiming I have spotted the new direction of travel.