COMPLETE COVERAGE | FRONT LINES | AMERICA AT HOME | INTERACTIVES »

Q&A: UK commits more troops

Royal Marines, who recently took part in exercises in Oman, are among the troops on 48-hour stand-by

LONDON England -- As thousands of British troops are put on 48-hour stand-by for possible duty in Kabul and other newly-captured cities in Afghanistan, CNN's European Political Editor Robin Oakley assesses what their role is likely to be.

Q: Is there any significance in the timing of Britain's decision?

A: There are up to 10,000 British troops on a two-day notice to travel instead of the usual five-days notice they would be on. This is clearly part of the politics catching up with the military action in Afghanistan. There has been some surprise in the coalition by the speed of the advance against the Taliban and the taking of cities such as Kabul. There is something of a power-vacuum there now and so there is a need to produce a stability force.

AUDIO CNN's Robin Oakley: Filling the vacuum 2 MB / 180 sec WAV sound   VIDEO Madeleine Albright, former U.S. Secretary of State, on a post Taliban government in Afghanistan (November 13) Play video (QuickTime, Real or Windows Media)    CNN.COM SPECIAL REPORT  CNN NewsPass Video  Agencies reportedly got hijack tips in 1998  MORE STORIES Intelligence intercept led to Buffalo suspects Report cites warnings before 9/11  EXTRA INFORMATION Timeline: Who Knew What and When? Interactive: Terror Investigation Terror Warnings System Most wanted terrorists What looks suspicious? In-Depth: America Remembers In-Depth: Terror on Tape In-Depth: How prepared is your city?  RESOURCES On the Scene: Barbara Starr: Al Qaeda hunt expands? On the Scene: Peter Bergen: Getting al Qaeda to talk

Q: What sort of duties will such a force undertake?

A: The troops will not to be used for further offensives against the Taliban, but will more likely be used for the restoration of civil order, for tasks like rebuilding airports, for mine clearing and to essentially provide the basics strands of order needed in a civil society now that the military action is moving on elsewhere.

Q: So will these additional troops become the effective interim government of Afghanistan?

A: In a sense, yes. There is a power vacuum that needs to be filled. Most people are talking about some sort of United Nations force being assembled over time to take over in Kabul and Mazar-e Sharif and areas like that. Particularly they want to prevent any revenge killings like we saw when Kabul was taken over by the Taliban in 1996, or before that when it was taken over by the Northern Alliance in 1992.

Q: What is the longer-term plan?

A: All this military action and advance has happened so fast that the coalition process of gathering a broad-based administration for Afghanistan has not been completed by the time that Kabul has been taken, as they rather expected to happen. Talks are still going on, of course. The six countries neighbouring Afghanistan are talking with the U.S. and Russia about what can be done. But in the meantime somebody has to take control and provide some kind of order and that's the sort of thing these British troops and others will be used for.

Q: What is British public opinion likely to be over the deployment of this large number of troops in Afghanistan?

A: I think it will probably take a turn up again in terms of support for the military efforts in Afghanistan because of the success in capturing Mazar-e Sharif and Kabul. Opinion had been going down for a little while because there appeared to be a military stalemate and not much progress -- people were beginning to wonder about the military objectives and whether the coalition allies knew exactly where they were going. This kind of success, I think, will boost public opinion and make people feel that the enterprise has been worthwhile. I think there will be support for British troops being sent in this way so long as their functions are clearly defined.

Q: What is the significance of the term 'stability force'?

A: It is interesting that the British Ministry of Defence is not talking about this as a peacekeeping force but as a stability force. They don't want a peacekeeping force having to hold the ring between different warring factions and risk being shot at by both. This is very much a stability force to help with the restoration of order and I think given all the promises we had from British Prime Minister Tony Blair and other coalition leaders, who said, 'After the military action we won't walk away -- we will try to create a decent society for the people of Afghanistan,' people will support that aim and I would think there will be support for the sending of further troops.