BRITAIN has spent more than £1.5m in Afghanistan this year on a controversial scheme to bribe members of the Taliban to lay down their arms, even though it has failed to persuade any significant figures to defect.

The money was allocated in January and May after the killings of two top commanders, Mullah Osmani and Mullah Dadullah, and the arrest of Mullah Obaidullah, all members of the Taliban’s ruling shura, or council.

British officials expected this would lead to a dip in Taliban morale and encourage less extremist members to cross over, fearing that they were on the losing side — the so-called “Dadullah effect”.

Instead, heavy fighting has continued in the southern province of Helmand, where British forces have suffered 23 deaths so far this year. The only Taliban who have defected have mostly been foot soldiers, of whom there seems to be an unlimited supply, both from the madrasahs, or religious schools, in Pakistan and among disillusioned Afghans.

“It hasn’t had the results we’d hoped,” admitted a senior Foreign Office official, “though not for want of effort on our part.”

The news comes as David Miliband, the foreign secretary, prepares to fly to Afghanistan and Pakistan this week for his first key trip in his new post. Afghanistan has been chosen to show the commitment of Gordon Brown’s government to what it still regards as “a winnable war”, and to try to persuade Nato allies to step up their contributions.

Britain has 7,100 troops in Afghanistan — more than in Iraq — and officials no longer talk of withdrawal dates. The British ambassador to Kabul said recently that the country may take 30 years to stabilise. Senior military figures have been warning that Afghanistan could end up worse than Iraq.

Lord Inge, former chief of the defence staff, told the House of Lords this month that it was time “to face up to the consequence of strategic failure in Afghanistan and what that would mean for Nato”.

Last week a report by the Commons defence committee painted an alarming picture of spreading insurgency, insufficient troops and helicopters and confusion over strategy.

“The idea was to shake people up,” said James Arbuthnot, the Conservative chairman of the committee. “The international community as a whole is looking at Afghanistan as if a curious mime is being carried out that has no bearing on their lives.”

He added: “If Nato can’t patrol the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan . . . the insurgents will come one way and drugs the other.”

Miliband is keen to differentiate the Afghan conflict from that in Iraq.

In Kabul he will re-emphasise Britain’s long-term commitment and point out that Afghanistan is the real frontline on the war on terror.

“I don’t think there will be any change of direction but there will be a change of emphasis,” said a Foreign Office official. “There is more of a buzz about Afghanistan, more clarity of commitment, a sense that the dossier is being given priority.”

Miliband’s immediate challenge may be to convince the Dutch and Canadians, who also have troops in southern Afghanistan, to remain when their mandates expire in the next two years. Both face domestic opposition to staying on, which could leave Britain and the United States alone in the south.

He is also likely to face questions about the morality of rewarding Taliban fighters who have been killing British soldiers.

Until this year Britain had been sceptical about the independent peace strengthening programme to win over the Taliban. Although it claims to have persuaded about 4,000 people to lay down their arms, there is doubt about the numbers and almost all are low-ranking members. But in January, Whitehall was persuaded to change its policy as improved intelligence had helped to eliminate some key figures from the insurgency.

Osmani, operational commander for the six southern provinces, was killed in an airstrike in Helmand last December. Obaidullah, a former defence minister, was arrested in Pakistan in February. Then Dadullah, the one-legged Helmand commander, died in an operation involving the Special Boat Service in May.

“We saw that as a chance to communicate that the offer may not be on the table much longer,” said an official. “Come in now rather than wait to get slotted.”

The money was spent to spread this message, both through intelligence agencies and the peace strengthening commission, and also to pay for housing and transport for any who decided to make the switch.

Efforts to use Dadullah’s death to warn others were undermined by the Afghan government’s release of five Taliban including his brother, Mansoor Ahmad, in return for a kidnapped Italian journalist. Mansoor is now believed to be commanding Taliban operations in Helmand.

Dr Najib Mojadidi, deputy director of the peace strengthening scheme, criticised the international community for not supporting the programme. “I keep telling them we are absolutely short of funds,” he said. “If we could offer even one fifth of what they’re getting the other side of the border, many are willing to come over.”

Many Afghans are unhappy about the idea of rewarding killers. There was outrage last week when President Hamid Karzai pardoned a 14-year-old would-be suicide bomber who had been caught wearing an explosive vest and gave him US$2,000 to return to Pakistan.

The programme has been supported by the Americans but a top US general said he was sceptical: “It’s not like there’s some bright shining town on the hill for them to move to and you’re dealing with a pretty ruthless group on the other side.”

Times Recommends

• UN may halt 400-year-old 'freedom of the seas'
• Where the Rosetta belongs can’t be set in stone
• Gas deal on hold, but Ukraine may pay in the end