Behind the Smiles.(President Bush's coalition against terrorism)

You can feel winter coming on, and it's not just a matter of snowstorms blowing down the mountains of Afghanistan. The international alliance against terrorism is entering a new and dangerous phase, opening hidden cracks and fissures--not unlike crevasses in a slow-moving glacier.

Without question, European governments stand squarely behind America and the war. But political parties, even those in power, are feeling the strain of a conflict that seems not to be going entirely well--and at the very least looks set to stretch through the winter and beyond. Public-opinion polls continue to be strong, though there is clear erosion. A survey by London's Guardian last week found that British support for the war had fallen from 74 percent to 62 percent, with more than half of those polled favoring a pause in the air offensive. A French poll reported that backing for the war has dropped from 66 percent to scarcely a majority. And things can only get worse, according to most reckoning. Across Europe emotions run high over Afghan civilian casualties. Elections are coming up in Germany and France next year, doubtless cooling support for a conflict without clear victories. Time is not on the allies' side, argues Victor Bulmer- Thomas, director of the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London. Almost "inevitably," he suggests, today's unease will give way to tomorrow's doubts and, ultimately, outright disagreement.

It all began so well. Yes, there was that first frisson of anxiety, when George W. Bush initially seemed to be running from the crisis as he hopscotched across the United States in Air Force One. "Oh, my God, he can't handle this," one senior British official said afterward, recalling his (and much of Europe's) first reaction. But he has. From the quick-to-draw, unilateralist "cowboy" of six weeks ago, Bush has morphed into a statesman, winning not just praise but the admiration of the European allies for his restrained and deliberate handling of the crisis. The administration has been equally pleased (and no less surprised) by Europe's decisive supportiveness. Within 10 days the allies had evoked Article 5 of the NATO treaty, all for one and one for all. They offered troops and logistics help to the measure of their ability. The European Central Bank pumped money into the financial system; there were quick promises of aid and trade concessions for Pakistan, not to mention helpful diplomatic forays to Iran, Central Asia and the Middle East.

But now? A sense of creeping reservation is in the air. Awkward questions are being asked: why is Tony Blair traveling the world, holding the tenuous multicultural coalition together, explaining what's at stake and why the war is justified? Where is Washington's leadership? Europeans also fear that the United States may be losing sight of the fact that the military campaign is only part of the war on terror, despite the administration's early rhetoric. "It's not all bombs and anthrax," says a German analyst, who does not see the same energy and focus being put into the financial, intelligence and public- relations offensives.

Above all, there is deep worry about the course the war could take. Few dispute the basic aim: to hunt down Al Qaeda and eliminate its Taliban ally. But many fear the means the United States has chosen will not achieve the desired end--risking social, political and cultural havoc. "It's going from bad to worse," says a senior EU ...