I would argue that a marxist reassessment must be based not just, and not mainly, on moral principles but on an analysis of the material balance of forces and the underlying processes. Such a materialist morality, paradoxically, is more moral than idealist versions, which may be spitting in the wind, and may by their arbitrariness divide people who ultimately could be on the same side.
The following article in today's International Herald Tribune gives some assessment of how the balance of forces has shifted in the world. Russia and China have gained by forcing the US to use the language of cooperation with them. The US has gained substantially by being the only world power able to coordinate such force and it is likely to overlook the degree of consensus and other ancillary assistance that was necessary to make the Coalition against Terror possible.
My guess is that Britain's weakness as the USA's most loyal ally will impell it quietly to cooperate more with Europe as a whole and that alongside China and Russia forces will try to create a more multi-polar world at a time within the framework of apparent consensus when the USA appears even more ascendant.
Much will depend on how much the world can pick up the agenda of September 10th again before the terrorists' opportunism diverted everyone's attention, including allies and opponents of US imperialism.
http://www.iht.com/articles/41436.htm
When America Banged the Table and the Others Fell Silent by David Malone, former Canadian Ambassador to the United Nations
Chris Burford
London