This whole mess will invariably affect the dialogue within the Liberal leadership race. A quick perusal of the various candidates positions leads me to believe that Ignatieff has the most to gain politically from the new environment. Ignatieff's consistent "hawkish" stance, which has garnered much criticism, now has powerful imagery to blunt detractors. Ignatieff, whether you agree or disagree, is quite eloquent and knowledgable whenever the discussion turns to foreign policy matters. The entire "war on terra" is Ignatieff's domain, in the sense he has devoted much of his intellectual energy to the subject. It is quite reasonable to see a scenario where Ignatieff shines if the focus is on terrorism.
As a strategist, Ignatieff's stock rises as people speculate on the framework of the next election. Harper is sure to make national security a key plank, as he occupys the natural terrain of the right. Ignatieff is somewhat unique for a Liberal, in that his stances mirror that of his foe, in effect negating any advantage for the "get tough" Bush-inspired Tory speak. A debate on security and terrorism is something Ignatieff may well relish, which is unique amongst the current crop (with the possible exception of Rae). The tactics used by the American right to marginalize "dovish" Democrats don't apply to Ignatieff and this gives his candidacy added weight. The new math favors Ignatieff in my mind, and I would expect his handlers to take full advantage and guide the discussion to his "strong" suit.