A remarkable headline on an opinion piece about Afghanistan in The New York Times, following an interview with David Miliband: “Britain resolves, US wavers”. If the American press can look to policy on Afghanistan on this side of the Atlantic and see relative determination, vision and clarity of purpose, then things in Washington must be dire indeed.

It is now two months since General Stanley McCrystal, the commander of US and allied forces in Afghanistan, told President Obama that a surge of at least 40,000 troops was required for the international mission in that country to succeed. Mr Obama is not obliged to follow his recommendation, but he is obliged to do something other than sit on his own hands. “I will never rush the solemn decision of sending you into harm’s way,” Mr Obama told the military, in a speech this week. This is not an unattractive sentiment. There is deliberation, nonetheless, and then there is dragging one’s feet.

Now is not a time for a president to dither. Yesterday, a Taleban suicide squad stormed a United Nations guesthouse in Kabul, leaving six international staff dead and nine injured. The Taleban do not carry out such attacks at random. They understand well the context in which they act, and do so in order to sway a decision that they believe can be swayed.

Some hesitation has been understandable. In the wake of August’s disputed election, Mr Obama rightly made it clear that he would not commit troops in support of an illegitimate Afghan government. More than a week has now passed since President Karzai gave the go-ahead for a second round of voting between himself and Abdullah Abdullah, his main challenger. There was an expectation that some American decision would follow, swiftly. It has not.

Mr Obama has done well at reaching out to governments who may, traditionally, be hostile. But America has allies, too, and they are growing edgy. This is something that his former presidential campaign rival John McCain understands, if Mr Obama does not. “We’re not operating in a vacuum,” Mr McCain told CBS television. “The President of the United States needs to make this decision and soon. Our allies are nervous and our military leadership is becoming frustrated.”

At home, committing more troops to Afghanistan may hurt Mr Obama, but procrastinating is not doing him any favours either. An ABC/ Washington Post poll has indicated that 63 per cent of Americans do not believe their President has a clear plan for dealing with Afghanistan. As the days pass, it looks as though they may be right.

It may sound perverse to trumpet Iraq as any sort of success story days after Baghdad’s largest bomb in two years killed 155. There is a reason, nonetheless, why such things became rare. The surge of troops into that country in 2007 showed that decisive action can make a huge difference for the better in a conflict, just as the chaotic, meandering, wasted time beforehand showed the bloody toll of inaction and delay.

In war, morale matters. Coalition troops must risk death every day, without knowing what their ultimate purpose is, whether that purpose will change, or even if they have one at all. The resignation in September, but revealed this week, of Matthew Hoh, a senior US official, is a sympton of drift and despair. Mr Hoh is a former Marine captain, and was cited for “uncommon bravery” in Iraq. “My resignation is based not on how we are pursuing this war,” he said, “but why, and to what end.” Only Mr Obama can answer that question, and he must do so soon.

Until he does so, people will continue to die without knowing why. The President must show at least as much resolve as his British allies. It does not seem a lot to ask.