ALL anyone wants to know about is the rock. The idea that British spies were contacting Russian agents by sidling up to a fake rock in a snowy Moscow square to transmit data to it — and that one of them finally heaved it up and waddled off with it — is pure comedy.

There must be a flicker of a question of whether spies are underemployed after the end of the Cold War, that they are driven to such fancy. No doubt a “talking rock” — apparently an electronic version of the old dead letter box — is an ingenious way to swap data between people who don’t want to meet face to face.

But it is hard to think that technology could not create something less vulnerable, which they supposedly had to visit, in person, to operate. After all, Russia has never been more permeable, or easier to spy on — or open to commercial offers. All kinds of state property and information have turned out to be for sale. Only last week, Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, announced that the US was cutting jobs across its European embassies, and Moscow, it seems, is top of the list.

But whatever the wisdom of British operations in Moscow, there is a much more serious side to the slew of allegations from Russia about the British presence. They mark yet another aggressive move from President Putin. We must assume this is the face of Russia for years to come.

Of all the spying accusations, the nastiest in its implications is that Britain has been supporting human rights groups. The sums of money are hardly large. Russian state television accused the Embassy of transferring £23,000 to the Moscow Helsinki Group, a leading human rights group that has repeatedly criticised Putin.

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office has said that it has indeed supported rights groups, but that all its efforts were well-known and “proper”. The Moscow Helsinki Group said it had not received British funding since 2004 and that Russia’s complaints are a pretext for cracking down on such groups. That is surely right. Of all the steps Putin has taken that have cut away at hopes that Russia was moving towards democracy, his assault on human rights groups has been among the worst.

At the turn of the year he signed a new law severely restricting their financing and work. His motives are no mystery. Moscow has been suspicious of groups promoting democracy since the “revolutions” in Ukraine, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan put opposition leaders in power.

Putin has not been inhibited in the slightest by Russia’s presidency of the G8 group of industrialised democracies. The message is clear: he is not trying to make Russia a democracy, and is immune to peer pressure. What should the US and Europe do? In a sense, Putin’s decisions simplify relations, if in an ugly way.

The answer is to stick to the few points at the top of the West’s concerns: Iran, oil and gas, and Chechnya, where Russia’s bloody heavy-handedness may spark a spreading war.

Those are worth tough talk — even a row. But £20,000 and a “talking rock”? If Putin chooses to make this into a big confrontation, it will show that, taking his cue from the temperatures of -21C gripping Russia, he wants to move his relations with Europe to a new degree of chill.

Times Recommends

• Michael Jackson: Not the final chapter
• Indian Army spends10m rupees on golf buggies
• Brüno toned down for 15 rating