Conservative and Labour politicians are heeding the tide of British public opinion with recent statements attempting to put distance between themselves and the thugs in the Bush administration. First David Cameron attacked the “unrealistic and simplistic” neoconservative philosophy (to the author of Neoconservatism: why we need it, I say "Ha ha ha ha ha ha"). Then Charlie Falconer calls Guantanamo "a shocking affront to the principles democracy".
Regarding what to do about Afghanistan, British foreign policy is still in use-full-force-mode. Informed and thoughtful voices such as Rory Stewart, who served with the British mission to southern Iraq and seems to know Afghanistan quite well too, are asking whether putting more force into the south may only inflame affront to local identity and increase the sense of threat to local power elites. The question I haven't heard much asked is how far if at all those local interests can be split from others with, shall we say, an internationalist mission, not to speak of how if at all heroin supply could be reduced.