One of the most often used arguments against our intervention in Iraq is 'what about Zimbabwe?' (or North Korea, or anywhere where people are governed by a tyranny).

It is, of course a flawed argument. Our lack of action elswehere is not an argument against action in Iraq; it is an argument in favour of acting elsewhere, too.

But at least we do not call Mugabe an ally, and we make gestures (albeit tokenistic) against him and his regime.

The classification of Karimov, however, as an ally is based on the most cynical realpolitik foreign policy - that your enemy's enemy is your friend. The liberal foreign policy of Bush and Blair is something very different, as Blair outlined in his seminal Chicago speech in 1999.

President Bush was right when he stated in 2003 that

Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom... did nothing to make us safe - because in the long run, stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty.

Bush must thus be criticised for failing to follow the logic of his own otherwise admirable foreign policy. The US should not give support to tyrants - especially murderous tyrants; it should work to remove them.