The disclosure of 75,000 US military logs covering the war in Afghanistan from 2004 to 2010 by the Wikileaks website probably represents the biggest leak ever in US intelligence.

The information was leaked at a time of growing opposition to the war among the American electorate, soon after the US changed its commander in Afghanistan and as Nato casualties mount on a daily basis.

'The Afghan War Diary', as the leaked information has been called by Wikileaks, is bad news for US President Barack Obama; it is also highly embarrassing and could undermine the US and Nato war effort, potentially putting US soldiers and their Afghan allies at risk. It is never easy for the media to decide whether a leak should take place or not, but when issues of national security are at stake, the choice becomes even more delicate.

Wikileaks' most irresponsible disclosure - and without doubt the one with the gravest consequences - was its leak of the names of Afghans who secretly work with US and Nato forces and provide them with much needed information and intelligence.

The Taliban have often killed Afghans they suspect of collaborating with international troops, so these disclosures could well result in further assassinations, and this is something Wikileaks has to live with.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has strongly condemned the release of this information calling it "extremely irresponsible and an act that one cannot overlook". Addressing a news conference, Karzai said the lives of these informants "will be in danger now".

Although most of the leaked documents were low level intelligence reports and did not reveal anything particularly new - except the names of Nato informants - they reveal the difficulties of this war, which has had a limited strategic success.

The leaks also shed more light on the way the war is being conducted, how Afghan civilians are sometimes accidently killed by Nato's military operations - news that is often kept quiet - and perhaps most crucially how Pakistan and Iran are undermining the US war effort.

The classified US documents reveal that Pakistan's intelligence agency, the ISI, has been arming, funding and training the Taliban for years, which will fuel doubts among US lawmakers whether Pakistan can ever become a reliable US partner in this war. Considering the US provides Pakistan with $3 billion a year in aid, the claims about the ISI - which Pakistan has denied - are bound to raise some eyebrows in Washington.

Pakistan will no doubt now continue to be put under increased pressure by Nato and Afghanistan to stop playing a "double game" - in which it supports the war on terror while backing the Taliban - and end its links with the Afghan insurgents once and for all.

These latest allegations about Pakistan were followed by a remark by British Prime Minister David Cameron who, during a trip to India, accused Islamabad of "looking both ways" with regard to terrorism directed against India. So it has certainly been a bad week for Pakistan's image.

Karzai himself pointed an accusing finger at Pakistan during his news conference and asked why Afghanistan's allies were not doing more to shut terrorist havens in other countries.

"The war against terrorism is not in the villages of Afghanistan but in the sanctuaries, sources of funding and training outside Afghanistan," he said.

The revelations about Iran's involvement in Afghanistan are also worrying. Although like Pakistan's connection this comes as no particular surprise, the details show that Teheran is very deeply involved in aiding the Taliban, its historic enemy, as long as this harms US interests.

The documents show Iran not only supplies the Taliban with arms, which was common knowledge, but also finances, equips and trains both Taliban and Al-Qaeda insurgents. Iran's strategy is to tie down US troops in a long and unwinnable war, similar to its past strategy in Iraq.

President Obama is now facing dissent within his own party over the way this war is progressing, which is always a bad sign, and these revelations have only made the situation worse. One hopes this war will not split the Democratic Party like the Vietnam War divided the party in the late 1960s and in effect ruined Lyndon Johnson's presidency.

Soon after the leaks emerged, Democratic Senator John Kerry, chairman of the US Foreign Relations Committee and a close ally of Obama, said in a statement: "However illegally these documents came to light, they raise serious questions about the reality of America's policy toward Pakistan and Afghanistan."

Despite the unease over the conduct of the war in Afghanistan among Obama's fellow Democrats, the US House of Representatives last Tuesday approved a bill to provide an additional $37 billion to fund the US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

During the debate in Congress, Democratic Congressman Henry Waxman, also an ally of the President, remarked: "What has changed in my mind is I am so discouraged at the chances of our commitment in Afghanistan succeeding that I think it's time to say, no more."

Perhaps Obama should now consider Plan B, if such a strategy exists.