Original source: Morning Star (Britain)

The latest opinion polls in the United States conducted by the BBC, ABC and the German broadcaster ARD show that 20 percent of people think that the Afghan Karzai government is doing a poor job, compared with only eight percent in 2007.

In the US, 63 percent back the President's forces in Afghanistan, down from 71 percent in 2007 and 78 percent three years ago.

In Britain, there has been a similar decline in support for the presence of British troops in Afghanistan.

Both President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made much in their primary campaigns of withdrawal of troops from Iraq.

Obama's case was a logical continuation of his opposition to the war from 2003 and Clinton offered a mea culpa for her patriotic support for Bush in 2001 and 2003.

In his inauguration address, Obama managed to convey a brilliant sense of optimism on the home front, but, once again, he asserted the US military position around the world, albeit using much more conciliatory rhetoric than George Bush ever managed.

Obama has consistently argued that the 'real war' is in Afghanistan. At enormous cost, he is prepared to commit the US to 'win the war.'

Last Saturday, he dispatched Vice-President Joe Biden to the Munich security conference and his job appeared to be to set the mood for the Obama administration's foreign policy.

He opened with a tone of bipartisanship and claimed that the US would listen to international alliances and organizations and would consult with them.

So far, so good. He then went on to deal with three pressing issues.

On Iran, Biden praised the Persian civilization and confirmed a review of policy towards Iran and a willingness to talk.

Then came the aggressive fist.

'Continue down your current course and there will be pressure and isolation. Abandon the illicit nuclear program and your support for terrorism and there will be meaningful incentives.'

On Israel, he confirmed US support for a two-state solution and defeat for extremism, adding that the US would build on the positive elements of the Arab Peace Initiative.

However, he offered not one word of condemnation for Israel's occupation of the West Bank, illegal use of weaponry in Gaza or imprisonment of Palestinian parliamentarians.

Biden's views on Afghanistan came the nearest anyone has done to defining a war aim, which seems to be to prevent a 'terrorist safe haven' from existing in Afghanistan.

The Munich conference was attended by defense ministers, military top brass, including General David Petraeus, and ghosts from the cold war such as Henry Kissinger, who was warmly embraced by Biden.

Veteran peace activist Tom Hayden has just produced a very interesting presentation of a timeline of the US commitment, involvement and final defeat in Vietnam and he has compared it with Iraq.

Hayden, like many in the US, is deeply concerned that Obama's presidency will be distracted, undermined and finally derailed by pressing on with the war in Afghanistan. He fears that, for the war to be successful, military activity in Pakistan must increase, threatening serious destabilization of the Pakistani government.

MP John Hutton's contribution to the Munich conference was to repeat his endless bleating that the NATO powers are not stepping up to the plate and taking responsibility by committing more troops to the conflict.

British military operations in Afghanistan are becoming increasingly costly and increasingly dangerous as the British death toll nears 150. The civilian death toll was well over 2,000 in 2008. This figure already looks likely to be much higher this year.

The Ministry of Defense is obviously concerned that public opinion is quickly moving against the Afghan conflict, hence its support for Sky TV embedding Ross Kemp with British troops in Afghanistan, where he is able to graphically report on the hardships the soldiers face and the dangers with which they have to grapple.

What his program does not discuss is why the troops are there in the first place or what would constitute a victory were they to leave.

Last Thursday, a parliamentary debate showed the arrogance of Foreign Secretary David Miliband's view that the whole point of staying in Afghanistan was to support the Afghan government. He bizarrely claimed that it was not to 'create a new colony.'

In the debate, Miliband pointed out that the Department for International Development is spending £10.6 million on development assistance, but he conceded that there were problems of corruption and inefficiency in dispersing the program. He did not reveal the real cost of British military operations in Afghanistan, which now run into billions over the last seven years.

However much media manipulation and propaganda is promoted by the British government and the US administration about the bravery and commitment of soldiers, the reality is that this war has already lasted two years longer than the second world war and there is no prospect of an early departure while the current policies remain in place.

To make progress, the NATO and US forces know that they will have to cross into Pakistan in numbers in order to occupy much of the border region.

The Soviet Union was defeated in Afghanistan by the forces of the Mojahedin, created and funded by the US. Those very same weapons and organization are now ranged against the NATO and allied forces.

Now surely is the time for the West to realize that, by being sucked into Afghanistan in ever-greater numbers and refusing to open discussions with the Taliban, it is just continuing Bush's infamous and ill-fated war on terror.

At a time when the US and Western European economies are facing massive problems due to the failure of their banking systems, it seems strange that all should be committed to this costly and vainglorious attempt to create a government in the West's own image in Afghanistan.

Pakistan has an enormous army and nuclear weapons and the serious prospect of destabilization of Pakistan creates the ultimate horror spectacle for the whole world. It's time to think again.