Leading article: International help is needed to rescue this failing mission

The House of Commons Defence Select Committee's new report does its best to scrape together some reasons for optimism about the future of Afghanistan. But this attempt is unconvincing, especially in the light of other reports coming out of the country. Lord Inge, the former chief of the defence staff, warned last week of the risk of "strategic failure" in Afghanistan. The testimony of aid agencies is just as depressing. Among those who live and work in the country, optimism is in very short supply.

Afghanistan is fast becoming as grave a disaster for Western foreign policy as Iraq. Hamid Karzai's internationally supported government is perilously weak. The President's writ runs little further than the outskirts of Kabul. Warlords and their private armies control most of the rest of the country. The economic benefits that were promised by the West after the fall of the Taliban have not materialised. A few new roads and schools have been built, but no more. The country's economy runs on the cash from opium exports and foreign aid.

The most depressing development of all is the resurgence of the Taliban. Suicide bombers are being despatched to Kabul and Jalalabad. A campaign of murder is being waged against prominent women. The insurgency is growing. And in the Taliban's stronghold province of Helmand, a full-scale guerrilla war is raging. British forces in Helmand are engaged in some of the most fierce engagements they have experienced since the Second World War. The result is that 64 British soldiers have been killed, most since the escalation of the UK contingent last year. The assassination of Mullah Dadullah by British special forces has not demoralised the Taliban.

Foolish tactics by Western forces have not helped matters. British troops were charged with destroying opium crops. But this instantly made them a threat to local farmers. It is not easy to win the co-operation of a community when you are planning to wipe out its livelihood. The US use of aerial bombing against insurgents, with its inevitable innocent casualties, has also turned civilians against outside forces. President Karzai, in a rare criticism of his patrons, has even pleaded for an end to such "reckless" operations.

Britain's new ambassador in Kabul, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles asserted last month that "we are going to win this but it's not going to be a three-year sprint, it's a 30-year marathon". This misses the point. The painful truth is that Nato and US forces have become part of the problem in Afghanistan, not the solution. There is no great enthusiasm for the Taliban among the majority of Afghans. But, equally, there is little popular support for outside forces. And what goodwill remains is running out.

It is no use demanding that other Nato members demonstrate a greater military commitment, as the Defence Secretary Des Browne did yesterday. More firepower is not the answer. What is required is a redefinition of what we are trying to achieve in Afghanistan. It is time to internationalise fully the problem by bringing the United Nations and regional powers on board. Pakistan, Iran, Russia and India all have an interest in a stable future for the country. President Karzai needs their support. The West should lobby to ensure that he gets it. Pakistan's role is critical. The Taliban finds succour and refuge in Pakistan's lawless tribal areas. There can be no sustained progress in Afghanistan until the Pakistani government brings this to an end.

The Western military and political strategy in Afghanistan is not working. Our political leaders have a duty to develop a plan that offers something more than blind hope.