The British casualty rate in Afghanistan is continuing at a relentless pace, with four killed this month already and a total of 28 dying so far this year, mostly from enemy action.

No military commander would expect the Taleban to reduce their activities during the hot summer months but the deaths are a bitter blow for the forces now out in Afghanistan.

It is the fighting season and in a province as large as Helmand in the south where the British troops are based, the Taleban have little difficulty in concealing themselves in the communities where the British troops, serving alongside their Afghan counterparts, cannot maintain a permanent presence.

The 2nd Battalion The Parachute Regiment, one of the main combat units in 16 Air Assault Brigade which arrived in Helmand in April, has had a particularly tough tour, losing seven soldiers.

The number of wounded, some of them suffering serious disablement, has also been high. Between January 1 2006 and June 30 this year, 380 military personnel have been wounded in action. Fifty of these are categorised as being “very seriously wounded” and 74 as “seriously wounded”. Many will have lost limbs or will have been severely burned from explosions.

The general public has become accustomed to having British troops fighting in overseas campaigns. There have been enough of them in the last two or three decades. But at what point does the casualty toll begin to have a real impact on the way the public views the justification for war?

In Afghanistan, the steady flow of casualties, followed on each occasion by glowing tributes from the Ministry of Defence and condolences from ministers, has yet to provoke serious doubts in the public’s mind that this campaign has value and that the sacrifices made by the troops have been for a good cause.

Remarkably, the reaction from the families of those killed is nearly always intensely stoic, with responses invariably focusing on the pride felt for the husband or son or daughter.

The latest phase of Britain’s involvement in Afghanistan which began in early 2006 when more than 3,000 troops were deployed to Helmand - rising to 7,800 last year - has produced mixed results. While progress has been made in keeping the Taleban at bay and trying to improve the lives of the Afghan people, each rotating brigade sent to the province for six months at a time discovers that the challenges are in many ways unchanged. The Taleban have not gone away, they have not been defeated, and they still have the ability and capability to mount attacks and cause casualties.

The fighting in Helmand is not on the same scale as when 16 Air Assault Brigade was last in Helmand, in 2006. Then, the Taleban launched conventional formation attacks against British military outposts, and although they were always driven back, the casualty toll was high.

Today, the Taleban resort more to asymmetric warfare, targeting British troops with roadside bombs and mines. But, as recent incidents have demonstrated, the Taleban have not given up on ambushes and firefights, and several British soldiers have died recently while coming under fire.

British military commanders and the Taleban have learned lessons since the large-scale firefights in 2006. The campaign is less kinetic, but the combination of roadside bombs and gun battles has produced a steady flow of fatalities and serious injuries.

The statistics tell the story. Last year in the first six months, 23 died, compared with the 28 this year. June was the worst month this year, with 13 killed. Personnel from the Armed Forces have died in every month this year in Helmand. It’s what the military expects, and, so far, the public has gone along with it.

Times Recommends

• Please help: maimed children of war want their lives back
• Cabal seizes diamond riches to buy power
• White House gatecrashers got to the president