LOS ANGELES: The involvement of US Marines in Afghanistan may, in retrospect, turn out to be a watershed moment in the war on terrorism. But for now, significant numbers of US troops on the ground raise important questions about how the war is to proceed.

Will things continue to crumble rapidly for the Taliban, or is there more likely to be a lengthy and dangerous period of ferreting out determined Al Qaeda and Taliban “foreigners”? At what point can a military “victory” be declared? Perhaps most sensitive, how much is the public willing to accept American casualties, which President Bush now indicates are inevitable?

The quick seizing of ground by US troops is complicating political issues as well. The US has to avoid appearing like an occupation force, while searching for a way to expedite formation of a post-Taliban government that is stable and representative enough to take control from US troops.

The insertion of the Marines “is clearly a commitment of the United States to the effort, and it’s a risk in terms of the casualties that can be incurred,” says Scott Gartner, a political scientist at the University of California at Davis who specializes in military affairs. “In that sense, it’s clearly a change.”

Experts say the next phase in the war, tracking down Al Qaeda and Taliban forces, will be far more difficult than attacking them from the air with relative impunity as US forces have been doing.

Afghan forces, too, are notorious for their “long memory.” “Part of the Pakhtoon Wali, or code of honour, allows — no expects — that honour debts will be avenged and that such obligations can be passed on from generation to generation,” says a former US Army officer who has spent much time in Afghanistan. “This obligation will extend across national boundaries.”

The US obligation, as many see it, is to confront those guerrilla forces directly, as risky as that might be. So far, only a small number of US troops have been killed or injured in activities related to the war — most recently in a “friendly fire” incident in which five service members directing a close- air support strike were seriously injured in a bombing raid.

Despite the difficulties ahead, most experts say a significant presence of American ground troops is essential to the mission. Others say US ground forces might get bogged down in Afghanistan while political factions there continue their historic and sometimes violent competition. Says former Navy Captain Seaquist: “If the new government looks like the same old thugs doing the same old wrangling, and we look like — or are being portrayed as — yet another occupying power, we could see our image flip from saviour to invader.” —Dawn/LATS Service (c) Christian Science Monitor.