By Luke Baker

LONDON, March 6 (Reuters) - A blaze of publicity for Prince Harry's front-line assignment in Afghanistan has briefly drawn Britons' attention to the conflict but touched little on the harsh realities of a struggling military campaign.

British media have revelled in Harry's cameo appearance, broadcasting pictures of Queen Elizabeth's grandson firing a machine gun and running banner headlines on the "hero prince".

The combat role of third in line to the throne, has been used by politicians and army chiefs to remind Britons of the everyday sacrifices ordinary soldiers make on the front line.

The Ministry of Defence is happy. British media stood by an agreement not to publicise Harry's 10-week stint while he was still there -- until a U.S. Web site broke the news -- and he briefly brought some glamour to the army as its pin-up hero.

The image of the royal family has benefited and Prince Charles, Harry's father, said he now understood what the parents of personnel on the front line in Afghanistan went through.

But the realities of the war were all but glossed over.

"The media was suckered into a deal that gave the war in Afghanistan the most positive and glamorous coverage it has had since the very beginning six years ago," Peter Wilby, a political commentator for the Guardian, told Reuters.

"It was a marvellous boost for army recruitment and revived the legitimacy of a war for which support has been waning."

Under the deal, media organisations including Reuters kept quiet about Harry's deployment in exchange for photographs, video and text of his role once the assignment was completed.

Yet the publicity at the end of his assignment has focused little on the truths of a military campaign in which Britain's 7,800 troops are struggling even after six years at war.

Like British forces serving in Iraq, they face difficult questions about their performance in two of the most challenging conflicts the military has faced in the past 60 years.

BRITAIN UNDER PRESSURE

Newspapers have faithfully reported that Harry successfully called in air strikes -- he told pilots where their targets were -- during his time in Helmand province and took part in operations in which the ministry says 30 Taliban were killed.

But the Taliban now control at least 10 percent of Afghanistan, according to a U.S. intelligence assessment, and are running their own checkpoints in Helmand, a violent, unstable province in the south where British troops are based.

The United States, which is battling militants along the Afghan-Pakistan border, has criticised the tactics employed by its allies including Britain. It says they do not know how to wage an effective counter-insurgency campaign.

British forces have repeatedly mounted offensives to try to drive the Taliban out of strongholds in the north of Helmand, with occasional success. But basic problems such as a lack of helicopters often hamstring operations and the Taliban return.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, which is leading the 40,000-strong force in Afghanistan, acknowledges it needs more troops but few NATO member states are willing to provide them.

Britain says it has no extra soldiers to spare, partly because its troops are already badly stretched in Iraq but also because numbers of soldiers in the armed forces are generally down and recruitment is proving tough.

Any boost that "Harry's War" might bring -- and the ministry says that was not part of its intention in sending him to Afghanistan in the first place -- will not be seen for a while.

PROBLEMS IN IRAQ

In Iraq, Britain has wanted to draw down its remaining 4,500 troops and pull out for several months, but insecurity on the ground means it cannot do so.

Iraqi militants frequently fire rockets at Britain's main base outside the southern city of Basra -- killing an airman six days ago -- and five British citizens have been held captive by militants for the past 10 months.

The Ministry of Defence has been accused of covering up abuse, torture and executions by British soldiers in Iraq, and has taken out an injunction against a former special forces soldier to stop him talking about his experiences there.

Some experts have big doubts about Britain's performance in Iraq, where it once had hopes of being welcomed with open arms.

"Britain's role in Iraq, and especially in Basra, has been a complete failure," said Ghassan al-Attiyah, the head of the Iraqi Foundation for Democracy and Development.

"After five years, they have just handed over Basra and put it into the control of militias who are supported by Iran."

Much of the nuance of what is happening in the conflict has been lost in the glare of Harry's deployment.

Despite the publicity over what has become known as Harry's War, media experts say the Ministry of Defence may not gain much in the long term. The publicity has done little to focus attention on the real problems troops face in Afghanistan. (Editing by Timothy Heritage)

AlertNet news is provided by