Mullah Abdul Salem Zaeef has become the acceptable face of the Taliban.

By Chris Sands in Kabul

A cemetery lies near the home of Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, the Taliban's former ambassador to Pakistan. It's the kind of place found all across Kabul, which has long been a city of the dead. The patch of dirt, the small cragged tombstones and the flags of the martyrs are all just another part of the landscape.

Two guards from the Afghan intelligence service sit outside his house and it's not immediately clear if they are there for his own protection or to keep an eye on his movements. Maybe it's a mixture of both and, like so much else here, the truth is in the grey areas.

Zaeef has become the acceptable face of the Taliban these past few years. The insurgents may have officially distanced themselves from him, but privately he still has their respect. For the government he is regarded as a middleman, someone who might help broker the negotiations that end this carnage.

If someone seen as relatively moderate and open to discussion is fast running out of hope, then, it is a probably a fair indication of where the country is heading.

"I think the good way for the Americans, for us and the world community is to stop war. But I am not optimistic. If they are sending more troops to Afghanistan, that means they are creating more problems," Zaeef told me in softly spoken English.

"I do not believe they are fighting the Taliban. They are fighting with the nation of Afghanistan now. If they want to defeat all the nation, kill them, it is not possible."

With over a month still left, this has already been the grimmest year since the 2001 invasion. The previous highest annual body count for US soldiers was passed on the seventh anniversary of 9/11 and it has kept on climbing, reaching 152 by this weekend. Another 109 foreign troops have so far lost their lives, 38 of them British. There are no such lists for civilians and the number of innocent fatalities can only be guessed at.

Violence is not just intensifying - it is spreading and assuming different forms. Roadside bombs, assassinations, and carefully coordinated attacks on government and military targets have all become common. The Taliban are entrenched on the borders of Kabul and new fronts are developing in the west and north, far away from their traditional strongholds.

When Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, visited Downing Street on Thursday he insisted the situation back here is not deteriorating. Many in London and Washington disagree and the world has again turned its attention to a war it was already meant to have won.

First came a statement in September from Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that "frankly, we are running out of time". Compared to the bland optimism usually uttered, it was a candid admission. Similar anxieties have since come to light.

In a diplomatic cable leaked to a French newspaper, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, Britain's ambassador to Kabul, is alleged to have said the presence of foreign soldiers is "part of the problem, not the solution". Meanwhile, the senior commander of UK troops here recently announced that a "decisive military victory" should not be expected.

When it emerged that associates of militant groups including the Taliban had met with representatives of the Afghan government for informal talks in Saudi Arabia during the late summer, there seemed to be a growing consensus that dialogue with the insurgents was necessary.

But far from being a breakthrough, the gathering in Mecca was at best the first small steps on a very long road ahead. At worst, it was a false dawn that will come to represent a footnote in the history of the conflict.

Zaeef was there and soon after returning to Kabul he spoke bitterly about Afghans who have taken money from "the enemy" - the US - to fight their fellow countrymen and "poison" their homeland.

"The government of Afghanistan is recognised by the world community, but we know that the government is very far from the nation and the distance is increasing day by day," he said.

Even if Zaeef's quiet rage can be attributed in large part to the three-plus years he spent detained at Guantanamo Bay, it should not be dismissed. There are insurgents fighting now for similar reasons.

Before I arrived in Kandahar in March, an American NGO worker and her Afghan driver had been kidnapped and murdered. The city was slipping away. People were scared of the police and the foreign troops and for no other reason they often supported the Taliban.

Rahmat, a rebel commander who still spends his time killing and wounding the British in neighbouring Helmand, could have been displaying bravado when he spoke about having enough weapons to "fight for another 50-years". However, his description of why a number of Afghans have taken up arms is something Karzai would accept.

"When we were doing operations in the beginning not even two Talibs could shelter themselves in a village because the people were not happy and they were not giving them space or food," he said.

"But after a while, when families were killed and tribal leaders were arrested and accused of having links with Al-Qaeda or being involved in drug trafficking, the people started to support us, shelter us and join us."

If formal negotiations are to be held between members of the insurgency, the Afghan government and its international allies, Rahmat will not be a part of them. For now at least, he is what the US and British would call an "irreconcilable".

The same applies to Noor Mohammed, another Taliban commander from Helmand. In a separate interview during March, he told me he had actually voted for Karzai back in 2004.

"As long as I have blood in my veins and a head on my body I will seek revenge. The foreigners were shouting that they would bring peace to Afghanistan, but where is this peace? They are just killing civilians," he said.

"As long as five Afghans are left alive in the country they will seek revenge. Look, I was talking to my children about Islam and what was happening to us and now they will not allow this to continue. That is the way the system works."

The problem for the US and NATO coalitions is that if these men cannot be negotiated with, they also cannot be beaten by force. There is now speculation that next year as many as 20,000 American soldiers will be added to the 32,000 currently here. Britain is rumoured to be considering deploying another 2,000 troops.

A surge risks playing into the Taliban's hands. The more foreigners there are, the more this will resemble the brutal occupation the militants describe it as. Afghans and particularly Pashtuns are traditionally hostile to outside interference. If the violence continues to escalate, they will wonder what the point of all this is.

In the south and east, where fighting is fiercest, people say the US and its allies are worse than the Soviets who spent nearly a decade tearing the country apart. Many have not resisted yet because they are tired of living through war after war, but that could easily change.

Kabul's descent into insecurity has also been alarming. Just over three years ago, American troops shopped for carpets in the capital and occasionally ate in local restaurants. Today they are understandably nervous and drive at speed through the streets with sirens wailing on their Humvees.

On November 3 an air strike killed scores of civilians at a wedding party in Kandahar. As reports of the tragedy were emerging a couple of days later, I had a pre-arranged interview with an Afghan MP and former Taliban commander.

Mullah Abdul Salam Rocketi is worth listening to because he has done exactly what the government is asking of his old colleagues: embrace the constitution.

He believes there should be no exceptions in attempts to talk to the insurgents. Senior leaders including Mullah Mohammed Omar, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and Jalaluddin Haqqani must all be approached with a view to striking a deal. Even in the likelihood that they reject the idea out of hand, he thinks it is still the right tactic. Deploying thousands of extra troops is not.

"If the Americans send some engineers we know they are here for reconstruction. If they send some doctors we know they are here to work in hospitals. If they send some soldiers then we know they are here to fight," Rocketi said.

As winter closes in and thick snow gets ready to blanket much of Afghanistan, the only certain thing is that peace seems further away than at any point before. The government and its foreign allies still have no clear strategy and the Taliban are holding all the important cards.

There has always been a route into the political fold for those insurgents who want it. Troop numbers have also been steadily rising for a while. Given the way the bloodshed has escalated, neither method can be said to have worked.

Innocent Afghans have suffered the consequences of failure. On Thursday several civilians were killed when a suicide car bomber attacked a US convoy in the eastern province of Nangarhar. Twenty-four hours earlier, schoolgirls had acid sprayed in their faces in Kandahar.

John Hutton, Britain's Defence Secretary, has said this might be "the defining conflict" of the 21st century and compared it to the struggle against Nazism. Close up, it does not look so black and white.

Hardcore groups of extremists now find their ranks filled with people fighting for a variety of reasons, including what they regard as the liberation of their country. Few want to take the war overseas and many accept they cannot continue with the policies of the old Taliban regime, which banned everything from music to kite flying.

Neither side, though, is willing to give ground where it ultimately matters. That time may come eventually, but until then the deaths will mount.