The general's report carries a direct call for extra troops

The US mission in Afghanistan will "likely result in failure" unless troops are increased within a year, the top general there has said in a report.

Gen Stanley McChrystal made his assessment in a confidential report obtained by the Washington Post.

He recently called for a revised military strategy in Afghanistan, suggesting the current one is failing.

More than 30,000 extra US troops have been sent to Afghanistan since May - almost doubling the US contingent.

The number of US troops in Afghanistan is already set to rise to 68,000 by the end of the year.

ANALYSIS Paul Reynolds, BBC world affairs correspondent

Gen McChrystal has dared to use the F-word - "failure". He wants a super-surge of troops to try to avoid that. Reinforcements are already being sent, almost doubling US troops by the end of this year. Now, the general wants perhaps tens of thousands more. Yet the request is in contrast to the stated goal of handing over operations more and more to the Afghan army. With the situation so critical, how can that happen? Answer - it cannot for the time being. And will President Obama agree? He is reluctant just to add to the numbers but without numbers, how can the US and its allies win? And will the Nato allies give more help? This must be doubtful.



Stark concerns have previously been expressed about the viability of the military mission in Afghanistan, but the BBC's Paul Reynolds says what is new about the general's warning is his outright use of the word "failure".

Gen McChrystal, who took over as military commander in May, is expected to make a separate request for tens of thousands of extra forces to be deployed.

He also says that training for Afghan forces needs to be speeded up - and that the growth of Afghan forces should also be accelerated.

A senior adviser to Afghan President Hamid Karzai said the government was not against more international troops being sent, though their success would depend on where they were sent.

But he agreed that domestic forces were crucial to the operation.

"Our official stance is that until our security forces are strengthened, both in terms of numbers and quality, there won't be a long-lasting peace in Afghanistan," Sebghatullah Sanjar told the BBC.

US President Barack Obama has recently said the right strategy for Afghanistan will have to be found before any fresh commitment of forces can be considered.

'Mission failure'

MARDELL'S AMERICA [Obama] will find it tough to sell the general's policy to a party and public reluctant to see more men and women sent to bolster an Afghan government accused of election fraud

Mark Mardell

BBC North America editor

Read Mark's thoughts in full

In his latest assessment, Gen McChrystal is quoted by the Washington Post newspaper as saying: "Failure to gain the initiative and reverse insurgent momentum in the near-term [next 12 months]... risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible."

He warns that "inadequate resources will likely result in failure".

"Additional resources are required," the general states in the summary of the report.

He says that failure to provide adequate resources "risks a longer conflict, greater casualties, higher overall costs, and ultimately, a critical loss of political support".

"Any of these risks, in turn, are likely to result in mission failure."

HAVE YOUR SAY It can be a success if all parties develop a backbone coupled with a clearly defined goal Rich P, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

But Gen McChrystal adds that the increase in troop numbers must come in the context of a revised military strategy in the country.

He has consistently called for a strategy which makes its top priority the protection of the Afghan people.

In the report Gen McChrystal also:

Provides new details about the sophisticated nature of the Taliban insurgency

Criticises Nato forces for focusing more on tackling insurgents than protecting Afghan civilians

Censures the Afghan government for lack of action on widespread corruption

Warns that Afghanistan's prisons have become a sanctuary for active insurgents

All of these factors, he claims, have led to a "crisis of confidence among Afghans" in the face of a resilient insurgency.

MCCHRYSTAL'S NEW STRATEGY Focus on protecting civilians when fighting insurgents Interact more closely with local populations More troops needed for effective counter-insurgency Better training for Afghan forces to operate independently Government and NGOs to provide services after military action More constructive engagement with Taliban fighters willing to talk

McChrystal's blunt warning Profile: Gen Stanley McChrystal Afghanistan: Security map

The increase in troop numbers would provide security for the Afghan people and create a space in which good governance can take root, Gen McChrystal argues.

In a blunt evaluation, he says that both the Afghan government and international forces face losing credibility among the Afghan population.

"Pre-occupied with protection of our own forces, we have operated in a manner that distances us - physically and psychologically - from the people we seek to protect," he says.

But 2009 has been the deadliest year for foreign troops in Afghanistan since the fall of the Taliban in 2001.

Italy is holding a day of mourning for six soldiers killed in a Kabul bomb attack last week. And the future of German troops in Afghanistan has become a central issue in Germany's election campaign.

The Washington Post says that the report has been presented to US Defence Secretary Robert Gates.

A recent opinion poll showed that a narrow majority of Americans now oppose the conflict.

Last week the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm Mike Mullen, told the US Senate Armed Services Committee that more troops might be required to tackle the mounting Taliban insurgency.

But President Obama later said there was "no immediate decision pending" on sending more troops to Afghanistan.

"You have to get the strategy right and then make the determination about resources," Mr Obama said.

The BBC's security correspondent Nick Childs says the timing of this leak, and the stark language contained in it, is certain to pile the pressure on the Obama administration, particularly when the president has just said he is not ready to make a final decision.

This is largely because the issue has become so politically charged in Washington, our correspondent says.

US MEDIA REACTION TO MCCHRYSTAL REPORT

Spencer Ackerman, at the Washington Independent, points out that the president's recent statements have been made with full knowledge of Gen McChrystal's recommendations.

The National Review's Rich Lowry welcomes Gen McChrystal's contribution.

Foreign Policy's Peter Feaver suspects the leak come from inside the White House, not from Gen McChrystal's team.

Commentary's Jennifer Rubin fears that any delay in implementing Gen McChrystal's proposals could damage the US mission in Afghanistan.

Robert Dreyfuss, of the Nation, counsels Mr Obama to ignore Jennifer Rubin and her conservative colleagues.

Kevin Drum, blogging at Mother Jones, advises liberals to approach Gen McChrystal's proposals with an open mind.