In the midst of a slew of what seems like the typical bad news out of Somalia -- killings by insurgents, killings by Ethiopian troops, hijackings by pirates -- two developments of the last two days may give at least a flicker of hope.

The U.N. Security Council authorized on Tuesday an African Union force in Somalia for another six months, a day after Somalia's government signed a peace agreement with some opposition figures.

A unanimous resolution also asked U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to work with the AU to strengthen U.N. logistical, political and technical support to help bring the African Union Mission in Somalia, or AMISOM, up to U.N. standards.

Even taken in concert, these two steps will by no means end the chaos reigning in Somalia. For one, not all of the groups responsible for violence in Somalia -- including the most intransigent extremists -- signed the accord reached yesterday. For another, the re-authorization of AMISOM's mandate simply represents a continuation of an all too unstable status quo. Nonetheless, with Nigerian units forthcoming, if the UN can follow up on its commitment to upgrade the AU force, then this will represent the best feasible scenario for the moment, when rashly deployed UN peacekeepers would likely only fall into the trap of struggling to maintain an incomplete peace.

The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court just announced that alleged war crimes in Georgia are "under analysis" by his office.

"Georgia is a State Party to the Rome Statute [that created the ICC]" he said. "My Office considers carefully all information relating to alleged crimes within its jurisdiction -- war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide - committed on the territory of States Parties or by nationals of States Parties, regardless of the individuals or groups alleged to have committed the crimes. The Office is inter alia analyzing information alleging attacks on the civilians."

So what exactly does this mean? For one, don't expect any Georgians or Russians to be hauled to the Hague anytime soon--if ever. Being "under analysis" is the first step in a very long series of events before allegations of war crimes turn into indictments or arrest warrants. And it is hardly guaranteed that ICC indictments will ever be pursued in this case. Other criteria: like gravity of the alleged crimes and whether or not local courts are pursuing their own investigations must also be satisfied.

Still, this move by the court is significant for the fact that it is the only conflict in the global north that is in the ICC's sights. All four cases before the court are from Africa (Darfur, Northern Uganda, Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Central African Republic) as are three of the five other situations currently "under analysis" (Chad, Cote D'Ivoire, Kenya, Columbia and Afghanistan).

I spoke to an ICC lawyer handling the Georgia case who talked me through the procedural issues but would not discuss the contents of Russian and Georgian allegations of war crimes. This Human Rights Watch report, however, gives you a good sense of what the court may be dealing with should it ever launch a full investigation in Georgia. It's not a pretty picture.

UPDATE: The aforementioned ICC lawyer responds: "The one thing not to underestimate, however, is that once triggered the Court process will continue until the evidence driven process finds its conclusion. If crimes have been perpetrated that fit our criteria, someone will be held to account. This may well be after the smoke clears but it is not something that should, or in this case is, being dismissed by the parties to the conflict."

As if the skyrocketing prices of food in the developing world were not enough, those struggling to afford enough to eat are now dealing with another twist: a sharpening hierarchy that is inducing even countries with not enough food for themselves to sell it off to the highest bidders. FT reports:

The race by food-importing countries to secure farmland overseas to improve their food security risks creating a "neo-colonial" system, the United Nations' top agriculture official has cautioned.

The warning by Jacques Diouf, director-general of the Food and Agriculture Organisation, comes as countries from Saudi Arabia to China plan to lease vast tracts of land in Africa and Asia to grow crops and ship them back to their markets.

The proof is in the pudding, of course -- or in this case, perhaps in the sorghum -- and, as this Jeffrey Gettleman NYT article made clear, Sudan is in fact one player in this new game, selling off a quantity of crops large enough to feed the displaced population in its western province of Darfur.

Something tells me that "locavores" would be none too happy about this dynamic.